Green salads can be a powerhouse of nutrition : Nutrition : Active Low-Carber Forums

View Full Version : Green salads can be a powerhouse of nutrition

Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums

Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Dr. Jai Ma

Sat, Oct-02-04, 19:17

Green salads can be a powerhouse of nutrition

Forwarded message from fidyl@yahoo.com

[ Subject: Green salads can be a powerhouse of nutrition [
From: fidyl@yahoo.com [ Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004

Green salads can be a powerhouse of nutrition

By Lynn F. Little Wednesday, September 8, 2004

http://www.herald-mail.com/?module=displaystory&story_id=8903-
4&format=html

Most Americans aren't getting enough fruits and vegetables in
their daily diet.

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's dietary
guidelines for Americans, everyone older than 2 should eat a
minimum of five servings of fruits and vegetables every day.
Yet, only about 28 percent of adults meet this goal.

One way to increase your fruit and vegetable intake is to
regularly consume a fresh green salad. Green salads can be
served as a side dish or as a hearty main dish. They can be
quick, simple and easy to prepare or more elaborate, with
complicated preparation steps. When put together with the
right ingredients, green salads can be a powerhouse of
nutrition.

o Begin with the greens. Salad greens are a good source of
many vitamins and minerals. Darker green leafy vegetables,
such as spinach, romaine lettuce, watercress and arugula,
generally contain more nutrients than paler ones.

o Color your plate. Different color families of vegetables
provide different nutrients as well as health-promoting plant
chemicals called phytochemicals. Be creative. Peppers, beets,
broccoli, cauliflower, green peas, onions and radishes all
make tasty additions.

o Don't forget the fruit. Adding fruit to a green salad is a
great way to add more color, taste and texture, not to
mention more vitamins, minerals and fiber. Pineapple chunks,
raisins, melon balls and berries complement any green salad.

o Pack on the protein. If your salad is the main course, it's
important to include protein-rich ingredients. Try garbanzo
beans, kidney beans or tofu.

o Count on calcium. Spooning on soy yogurt or 'cheeses' adds
the bone- building nutrient calcium to your salad.

o Get a little nutty. Before you dig into your salad, toss on
some chopped nuts such as almonds, walnuts or cashews.
Although nuts are high in fat, they contain mostly
heart-healthy monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats.

o Go easy on the croutons and 'bacon' bits. Opt for more
nutritious extras - like ground flaxseed.

o Dress your salad for success. Salad dressings often get a
bad rap because they can significantly increase the fat and
calorie content of an otherwise healthy salad. If you choose
to use regular salad dressing, limit the amount used on your
salad to 2 tablespoons. Using low-fat or fat-free dressings
can help curb the calorie and fat content. For a low-
calorie, nonfat topping, splash your salad with lemon juice
or flavored vinegar.

The 5 A Day For Better Health program, a national nutrition
campaign to encourage Americans to eat five or more
servings of fruits and vegetables every day, is sponsored
by the National Cancer Institute, the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services and the Produce for Better Health
Foundation. For recipes and tips, the go to
http://www.5aday.com on the Web.

Lynn F. Little is a family and consumer sciences educator with
Maryland Cooperative Extension in Washington County.

End of forwarded message from fidyl@yahoo.com

Jai Maharaj http://www.mantra.com/jai Om Shanti

Hindu Holocaust Museum http://www.mantra.com/holocaust

Hindu life, principles, spirituality and philosophy
http://www.hindu.org http://www.hindunet.org

The truth about Islam and Muslims
http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate

The terrorist mission of Jesus stated in the Christian bible:

"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came
not so send peace, but a sword. "For I am come to set a
man at variance against his father, and the daughter
against her mother, and the daughter in law against her
mother in law. "And a man's foes shall be they of his own
household.
- Matthew 10:34-36.

o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for
the educational purposes of research and open discussion.
The contents of this post may not have been authored by,
and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the
poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and
the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works. o If you
send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full
legal name, current e-mail and postal addresses, and
live-voice telephone number. o Posted for information and
discussion. Views expressed by others are not necessarily
those of the poster.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material
the use of which may or may not have been specifically
authorized by the copyright owner. This material is being made
available in efforts to advance the understanding of
environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic,
scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted
material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the
material on this site is distributed without profit to those
who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational
purposes by subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web
sites. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml If you wish to
use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission
from the copyright owner.

Tcomeau

Sun, Oct-03-04, 19:16

This most definitively goes into the "No Shit Sherlock" pile.

That is the basis for low-carbing. Get rid of the
nutritionally empty refined carbs and go back to real food
that contain real nutrition.

TC

usenet@mantra.com (Dr. Jai Maharaj) wrote in message
news:<MMc1t05TDKX9@rl497B6wweAbnv>...
> Green salads can be a powerhouse of nutrition
>
> Forwarded message from fidyl@yahoo.com
>
> [ Subject: Green salads can be a powerhouse of nutrition [
> From: fidyl@yahoo.com [ Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004
>
> Green salads can be a powerhouse of nutrition
>
> By Lynn F. Little Wednesday, September 8, 2004
>
> http://www.herald-mail.com/?module=displaystory&story_id=89-
> 034&format=html
>
> Most Americans aren't getting enough fruits and vegetables
> in their daily diet.
>
> According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's dietary
> guidelines for Americans, everyone older than 2 should eat a
> minimum of five servings of fruits and vegetables every day.
> Yet, only about 28 percent of adults meet this goal.
>
> One way to increase your fruit and vegetable intake is to
> regularly consume a fresh green salad. Green salads can be
> served as a side dish or as a hearty main dish. They can be
> quick, simple and easy to prepare or more elaborate, with
> complicated preparation steps. When put together with the
> right ingredients, green salads can be a powerhouse of
> nutrition.
>
> o Begin with the greens. Salad greens are a good source of
> many vitamins and minerals. Darker green leafy vegetables,
> such as spinach, romaine lettuce, watercress and arugula,
> generally contain more nutrients than paler ones.
>
> o Color your plate. Different color families of vegetables
> provide different nutrients as well as health-promoting
> plant chemicals called phytochemicals. Be creative.
> Peppers, beets, broccoli, cauliflower, green peas, onions
> and radishes all make tasty additions.
>
> o Don't forget the fruit. Adding fruit to a green salad is
> a great way to add more color, taste and texture, not to
> mention more vitamins, minerals and fiber. Pineapple
> chunks, raisins, melon balls and berries complement any
> green salad.
>
> o Pack on the protein. If your salad is the main course,
> it's important to include protein-rich ingredients. Try
> garbanzo beans, kidney beans or tofu.
>
> o Count on calcium. Spooning on soy yogurt or 'cheeses'
> adds the bone- building nutrient calcium to your salad.
>
> o Get a little nutty. Before you dig into your salad, toss
> on some chopped nuts such as almonds, walnuts or cashews.
> Although nuts are high in fat, they contain mostly
> heart-healthy monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats.
>
> o Go easy on the croutons and 'bacon' bits. Opt for more
> nutritious extras - like ground flaxseed.
>
> o Dress your salad for success. Salad dressings often get a
> bad rap because they can significantly increase the fat and
> calorie content of an otherwise healthy salad. If you
> choose to use regular salad dressing, limit the amount used
> on your salad to 2 tablespoons. Using low-fat or fat-free
> dressings can help curb the calorie and fat content. For a
> low- calorie, nonfat topping, splash your salad with lemon
> juice or flavored vinegar.
>
> The 5 A Day For Better Health program, a national nutrition
> campaign to encourage Americans to eat five or more
> servings of fruits and vegetables every day, is sponsored
> by the National Cancer Institute, the U.S. Department of
> Health and Human Services and the Produce for Better Health
> Foundation. For recipes and tips, the go to
> http://www.5aday.com on the Web.
>
> Lynn F. Little is a family and consumer sciences educator
> with Maryland Cooperative Extension in Washington County.
>
> End of forwarded message from fidyl@yahoo.com
>
> Jai Maharaj http://www.mantra.com/jai Om Shanti
>
> Hindu Holocaust Museum http://www.mantra.com/holocaust
>
> Hindu life, principles, spirituality and philosophy
> http://www.hindu.org http://www.hindunet.org
>
> The truth about Islam and Muslims
> http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate
>
> The terrorist mission of Jesus stated in the Christian
> bible:
>
> "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I
> came not so send peace, but a sword. "For I am come to
> set a man at variance against his father, and the
> daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law
> against her mother in law. "And a man's foes shall be
> they of his own household.
> - Matthew 10:34-36.
>
> o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for
> the educational purposes of research and open
> discussion. The contents of this post may not have been
> authored by, and do not necessarily represent the
> opinion of the poster. The contents are protected by
> copyright law and the exemption for fair use of
> copyrighted works. o If you send private e-mail to me,
> it will likely not be read, considered or answered if
> it does not contain your full legal name, current
> e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone
> number. o Posted for information and discussion. Views
> expressed by others are not necessarily those of the
> poster.
>
> FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted
> material the use of which may or may not have been
> specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This
> material is being made available in efforts to advance the
> understanding of environmental, political, human rights,
> economic, democratic, scientific, social, and cultural,
> etc., issues. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair
> use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in
> section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with
> Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is
> distributed without profit to those who have expressed a
> prior interest in receiving the included information for
> research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
> subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For
> more information go to:
> http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml If you wish
> to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes
> of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain
> permission from the copyright owner.

Harmony

Mon, Oct-04-04, 19:17

thank you and pearl for great public service. i bet the us
surgeon general does not work quite as hard to educate people.
we wouldn't need to spend all that money on bush's
"no-child-left-behind" program if children were vegetarians.
ironically enough, if a child wants veggie food at school
lunch, s/he is considered a special case, and the child has to
bring in a doctor's letter! is it any wonder american children
perform poorly compared to other countries?

"Dr. Jai Maharaj" <usenet@mantra.com> wrote in message
news:MMc1t05TDKX9@rl497B6wweAbnv...
> Green salads can be a powerhouse of nutrition
>
> Forwarded message from fidyl@yahoo.com
>
> [ Subject: Green salads can be a powerhouse of nutrition [
> From: fidyl@yahoo.com [ Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004
>
> Green salads can be a powerhouse of nutrition
>
> By Lynn F. Little Wednesday, September 8, 2004
>
> http://www.herald-mail.com/?module=displaystory&story_id=89-
> 034&format=html
>
> Most Americans aren't getting enough fruits and vegetables
> in their daily diet.
>
> According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's dietary
> guidelines for Americans, everyone older than 2 should eat a
> minimum of five servings of fruits and vegetables every day.
> Yet, only about 28 percent of adults meet this goal.
>
> One way to increase your fruit and vegetable intake is to
> regularly consume a fresh green salad. Green salads can be
> served as a side dish or as a hearty main dish. They can be
> quick, simple and easy to prepare or more elaborate, with
> complicated preparation steps. When put together with the
> right ingredients, green salads can be a powerhouse of
> nutrition.
>
> o Begin with the greens. Salad greens are a good source of
> many vitamins and minerals. Darker green leafy vegetables,
> such as spinach, romaine lettuce, watercress and arugula,
> generally contain more nutrients than paler ones.
>
> o Color your plate. Different color families of vegetables
> provide different nutrients as well as health-promoting
> plant chemicals called phytochemicals. Be creative.
> Peppers, beets, broccoli, cauliflower, green peas, onions
> and radishes all make tasty additions.
>
> o Don't forget the fruit. Adding fruit to a green salad is
> a great way to add more color, taste and texture, not to
> mention more vitamins, minerals and fiber. Pineapple
> chunks, raisins, melon balls and berries complement any
> green salad.
>
> o Pack on the protein. If your salad is the main course,
> it's important to include protein-rich ingredients. Try
> garbanzo beans, kidney beans or tofu.
>
> o Count on calcium. Spooning on soy yogurt or 'cheeses'
> adds the bone- building nutrient calcium to your salad.
>
> o Get a little nutty. Before you dig into your salad, toss
> on some chopped nuts such as almonds, walnuts or cashews.
> Although nuts are high in fat, they contain mostly
> heart-healthy monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats.
>
> o Go easy on the croutons and 'bacon' bits. Opt for more
> nutritious extras - like ground flaxseed.
>
> o Dress your salad for success. Salad dressings often get a
> bad rap because they can significantly increase the fat and
> calorie content of an otherwise healthy salad. If you
> choose to use regular salad dressing, limit the amount used
> on your salad to 2 tablespoons. Using low-fat or fat-free
> dressings can help curb the calorie and fat content. For a
> low- calorie, nonfat topping, splash your salad with lemon
> juice or flavored vinegar.
>
> The 5 A Day For Better Health program, a national nutrition
> campaign to encourage Americans to eat five or more
> servings of fruits and vegetables every day, is sponsored
> by the National Cancer Institute, the U.S. Department of
> Health and Human Services and the Produce for Better Health
> Foundation. For recipes and tips, the go to
> http://www.5aday.com on the Web.
>
> Lynn F. Little is a family and consumer sciences educator
> with Maryland Cooperative Extension in Washington County.
>
> End of forwarded message from fidyl@yahoo.com
>
> Jai Maharaj http://www.mantra.com/jai Om Shanti
>
> Hindu Holocaust Museum http://www.mantra.com/holocaust
>
> Hindu life, principles, spirituality and philosophy
> http://www.hindu.org http://www.hindunet.org
>
> The truth about Islam and Muslims
> http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate
>
> The terrorist mission of Jesus stated in the Christian
> bible:
>
> "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I
> came not so send peace, but a sword. "For I am come to
> set a man at variance against his father, and the
> daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law
> against her mother in law. "And a man's foes shall be
> they of his own household.
> - Matthew 10:34-36.
>
> o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for
> the
educational
> purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of
> this post may
not
> have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the
> opinion of the poster. The contents are protected by
> copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted
> works. o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely
> not be read, considered or answered if it does not contain
> your full legal name,
current
> e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone
> number. o Posted for information and discussion. Views
> expressed by others
are
> not necessarily those of the poster.
>
> FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted
> material the use of which may or may not have been
> specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This
> material is being made available in efforts to advance the
> understanding of environmental, political, human rights,
> economic, democratic, scientific, social, and cultural,
> etc., issues. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair
> use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in
> section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with
Title
> 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is
> distributed without profit to those who have expressed a
> prior interest in receiving the
included
> information for research, comment, discussion and
> educational purposes by subscribing to USENET newsgroups or
> visiting web sites. For more
information
> go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml If you
> wish to use copyrighted material from this article for
> purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must
> obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Tcomeau

Tue, Oct-05-04, 06:16

Parents who put their kids on vegetarian diets should be
charged with child abuse and sterilized.

TC

"harmony" <aka@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<10m3j1hp84tiv1e@corp.supernews.com>...
> thank you and pearl for great public service. i bet the us
> surgeon general does not work quite as hard to educate
> people. we wouldn't need to spend all that money on bush's
> "no-child-left-behind" program if children were vegetarians.
> ironically enough, if a child wants veggie food at school
> lunch, s/he is considered a special case, and the child has
> to bring in a doctor's letter! is it any wonder american
> children perform poorly compared to other countries?
>
>
> "Dr. Jai Maharaj" <usenet@mantra.com> wrote in message
> news:MMc1t05TDKX9@rl497B6wweAbnv...
> > Green salads can be a powerhouse of nutrition
> >
> > Forwarded message from fidyl@yahoo.com
> >
> > [ Subject: Green salads can be a powerhouse of nutrition [
> > From: fidyl@yahoo.com [ Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004
> >
> > Green salads can be a powerhouse of nutrition
> >
> > By Lynn F. Little Wednesday, September 8, 2004
> >
> > http://www.herald-mail.com/?module=displaystory&story_id=-
> > 89034&format=html
> >
> > Most Americans aren't getting enough fruits and vegetables
> > in their daily diet.
> >
> > According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's dietary
> > guidelines for Americans, everyone older than 2 should eat
> > a minimum of five servings of fruits and vegetables every
> > day. Yet, only about 28 percent of adults meet this goal.
> >
> > One way to increase your fruit and vegetable intake is to
> > regularly consume a fresh green salad. Green salads can be
> > served as a side dish or as a hearty main dish. They can
> > be quick, simple and easy to prepare or more elaborate,
> > with complicated preparation steps. When put together with
> > the right ingredients, green salads can be a powerhouse of
> > nutrition.
> >
> > o Begin with the greens. Salad greens are a good source
> > of many vitamins and minerals. Darker green leafy
> > vegetables, such as spinach, romaine lettuce, watercress
> > and arugula, generally contain more nutrients than paler
> > ones.
> >
> > o Color your plate. Different color families of
> > vegetables provide different nutrients as well as
> > health-promoting plant chemicals called phytochemicals.
> > Be creative. Peppers, beets, broccoli, cauliflower, green
> > peas, onions and radishes all make tasty additions.
> >
> > o Don't forget the fruit. Adding fruit to a green salad
> > is a great way to add more color, taste and texture, not
> > to mention more vitamins, minerals and fiber. Pineapple
> > chunks, raisins, melon balls and berries complement any
> > green salad.
> >
> > o Pack on the protein. If your salad is the main course,
> > it's important to include protein-rich ingredients. Try
> > garbanzo beans, kidney beans or tofu.
> >
> > o Count on calcium. Spooning on soy yogurt or 'cheeses'
> > adds the bone- building nutrient calcium to your salad.
> >
> > o Get a little nutty. Before you dig into your salad,
> > toss on some chopped nuts such as almonds, walnuts or
> > cashews. Although nuts are high in fat, they contain
> > mostly heart-healthy monounsaturated and polyunsaturated
> > fats.
> >
> > o Go easy on the croutons and 'bacon' bits. Opt for more
> > nutritious extras - like ground flaxseed.
> >
> > o Dress your salad for success. Salad dressings often get
> > a bad rap because they can significantly increase the fat
> > and calorie content of an otherwise healthy salad. If you
> > choose to use regular salad dressing, limit the amount
> > used on your salad to 2 tablespoons. Using low-fat or
> > fat-free dressings can help curb the calorie and fat
> > content. For a low- calorie, nonfat topping, splash your
> > salad with lemon juice or flavored vinegar.
> >
> > The 5 A Day For Better Health program, a national
> > nutrition campaign to encourage Americans to eat five or
> > more servings of fruits and vegetables every day, is
> > sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, the U.S.
> > Department of Health and Human Services and the Produce
> > for Better Health Foundation. For recipes and tips, the go
> > to http://www.5aday.com on the Web.
> >
> > Lynn F. Little is a family and consumer sciences educator
> > with Maryland Cooperative Extension in Washington County.
> >
> > End of forwarded message from fidyl@yahoo.com
> >
> > Jai Maharaj http://www.mantra.com/jai Om Shanti
> >
> > Hindu Holocaust Museum http://www.mantra.com/holocaust
> >
> > Hindu life, principles, spirituality and philosophy
> > http://www.hindu.org http://www.hindunet.org
> >
> > The truth about Islam and Muslims
> > http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate
> >
> > The terrorist mission of Jesus stated in the Christian
> > bible:
> >
> > "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I
> > came not so send peace, but a sword. "For I am come
> > to set a man at variance against his father, and the
> > daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law
> > against her mother in law. "And a man's foes shall be
> > they of his own household.
> > - Matthew 10:34-36.
> >
> > o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used
> > for the
> educational
> > purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of
> > this post may
> not
> > have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent
> > the opinion of the poster. The contents are protected by
> > copyright law and the exemption for fair use of
> > copyrighted works. o If you send private e-mail to me, it
> > will likely not be read, considered or answered if it does
> > not contain your full legal name,
> current
> > e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone
> > number. o Posted for information and discussion. Views
> > expressed by others
> are
> > not necessarily those of the poster.
> >
> > FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted
> > material the use of which may or may not have been
> > specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This
> > material is being made available in efforts to advance the
> > understanding of environmental, political, human rights,
> > economic, democratic, scientific, social, and cultural,
> > etc., issues. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair
> > use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in
> > section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with
> Title
> > 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is
> > distributed without profit to those who have expressed a
> > prior interest in receiving the
> included
> > information for research, comment, discussion and
> > educational purposes by subscribing to USENET newsgroups
> > or visiting web sites. For more
> information
> > go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml If
> > you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for
> > purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must
> > obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Tcomeau

Tue, Oct-05-04, 06:16

Dr. Jai Ma

Tue, Oct-05-04, 06:16

In article <10m3j1hp84tiv1e@corp.supernews.com>, "harmony"
<aka@hotmail.com> posted:
> thank you and pearl for great public service. i bet the us
> surgeon general does not work quite as hard to educate
> people. we wouldn't need to spend all that money on bush's
> "no-child-left-behind" program if children were vegetarians.
> ironically enough, if a child wants veggie food at school
> lunch, s/he is considered a special case, and the child has
> to bring in a doctor's letter! is it any wonder american
> children perform poorly compared to other countries?

Dhanyavvad for your encouragement. What you write about
American kids is indeed true for most of them. I have observed
that a healthy body and a healthy mind go together.

Jai Maharaj http://www.mantra.com/jai Om Shanti

> Dr. Jai Maharaj posted:
>
> > Green salads can be a powerhouse of nutrition
> >
> > Forwarded message from fidyl@yahoo.com
> >
> > [ Subject: Green salads can be a powerhouse of nutrition [
> > From: fidyl@yahoo.com [ Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004
> >
> > Green salads can be a powerhouse of nutrition
> >
> > By Lynn F. Little Wednesday, September 8, 2004
> >
> > http://www.herald-mail.com/?module=displaystory&story_id=-
> > 89034&format=html
> >
> > Most Americans aren't getting enough fruits and vegetables
> > in their daily diet.
> >
> > According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's dietary
> > guidelines for Americans, everyone older than 2 should eat
> > a minimum of five servings of fruits and vegetables every
> > day. Yet, only about 28 percent of adults meet this goal.
> >
> > One way to increase your fruit and vegetable intake is to
> > regularly consume a fresh green salad. Green salads can be
> > served as a side dish or as a hearty main dish. They can
> > be quick, simple and easy to prepare or more elaborate,
> > with complicated preparation steps. When put together with
> > the right ingredients, green salads can be a powerhouse of
> > nutrition.
> >
> > o Begin with the greens. Salad greens are a good source
> > of many vitamins and minerals. Darker green leafy
> > vegetables, such as spinach, romaine lettuce, watercress
> > and arugula, generally contain more nutrients than paler
> > ones.
> >
> > o Color your plate. Different color families of
> > vegetables provide different nutrients as well as
> > health-promoting plant chemicals called phytochemicals.
> > Be creative. Peppers, beets, broccoli, cauliflower, green
> > peas, onions and radishes all make tasty additions.
> >
> > o Don't forget the fruit. Adding fruit to a green salad
> > is a great way to add more color, taste and texture, not
> > to mention more vitamins, minerals and fiber. Pineapple
> > chunks, raisins, melon balls and berries complement any
> > green salad.
> >
> > o Pack on the protein. If your salad is the main course,
> > it's important to include protein-rich ingredients. Try
> > garbanzo beans, kidney beans or tofu.
> >
> > o Count on calcium. Spooning on soy yogurt or 'cheeses'
> > adds the bone- building nutrient calcium to your salad.
> >
> > o Get a little nutty. Before you dig into your salad,
> > toss on some chopped nuts such as almonds, walnuts or
> > cashews. Although nuts are high in fat, they contain
> > mostly heart-healthy monounsaturated and polyunsaturated
> > fats.
> >
> > o Go easy on the croutons and 'bacon' bits. Opt for more
> > nutritious extras - like ground flaxseed.
> >
> > o Dress your salad for success. Salad dressings often get
> > a bad rap because they can significantly increase the fat
> > and calorie content of an otherwise healthy salad. If you
> > choose to use regular salad dressing, limit the amount
> > used on your salad to 2 tablespoons. Using low-fat or
> > fat-free dressings can help curb the calorie and fat
> > content. For a low- calorie, nonfat topping, splash your
> > salad with lemon juice or flavored vinegar.
> >
> > The 5 A Day For Better Health program, a national
> > nutrition campaign to encourage Americans to eat five or
> > more servings of fruits and vegetables every day, is
> > sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, the U.S.
> > Department of Health and Human Services and the Produce
> > for Better Health Foundation. For recipes and tips, the go
> > to http://www.5aday.com on the Web.
> >
> > Lynn F. Little is a family and consumer sciences educator
> > with Maryland Cooperative Extension in Washington County.
> >
> > End of forwarded message from fidyl@yahoo.com
> >
> > Jai Maharaj http://www.mantra.com/jai Om Shanti
> >
> > Hindu Holocaust Museum http://www.mantra.com/holocaust
> >
> > Hindu life, principles, spirituality and philosophy
> > http://www.hindu.org http://www.hindunet.org
> >
> > The truth about Islam and Muslims
> > http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate
> >
> > The terrorist mission of Jesus stated in the Christian
> > bible:
> >
> > "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I
> > came not so send peace, but a sword. "For I am come
> > to set a man at variance against his father, and the
> > daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law
> > against her mother in law. "And a man's foes shall be
> > they of his own household.
> > - Matthew 10:34-36.
> >
> > o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used
> > for the
> educational
> > purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of
> > this post may
> not
> > have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent
> > the opinion of the poster. The contents are protected by
> > copyright law and the exemption for fair use of
> > copyrighted works. o If you send private e-mail to me, it
> > will likely not be read, considered or answered if it does
> > not contain your full legal name,
> current
> > e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone
> > number. o Posted for information and discussion. Views
> > expressed by others
> are
> > not necessarily those of the poster.
> >
> > FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted
> > material the use of which may or may not have been
> > specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This
> > material is being made available in efforts to advance the
> > understanding of environmental, political, human rights,
> > economic, democratic, scientific, social, and cultural,
> > etc., issues. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair
> > use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in
> > section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with
> Title
> > 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is
> > distributed without profit to those who have expressed a
> > prior interest in receiving the
> included
> > information for research, comment, discussion and
> > educational purposes by subscribing to USENET newsgroups
> > or visiting web sites. For more
> information
> > go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml If
> > you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for
> > purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must
> > obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Pearl

Tue, Oct-05-04, 06:16

"Dr. Jai Maharaj" <usenet@mantra.com> wrote in message
news:fLj7Q92TXSn5@QB263w9PnaIYBB...
> In article <10m3j1hp84tiv1e@corp.supernews.com>, "harmony"
> <aka@hotmail.com> posted:
> > thank you and pearl for great public service. i bet the us
> > surgeon general does not work quite as hard to educate
> > people. we wouldn't need to spend all that money on bush's
> > "no-child-left-behind" program if children were
> > vegetarians. ironically enough, if a child wants veggie
> > food at school lunch, s/he is considered a special case,
> > and the child has to bring in a doctor's letter! is it any
> > wonder american children perform poorly compared to other
> > countries?
>
> Dhanyavvad for your encouragement. What you write about
> American kids is indeed true for most of them. I have
> observed that a healthy body and a healthy mind go together.

Very true. Thanks harmony, and thank you Jai.

Pearl

Tue, Oct-05-04, 06:16

"tcomeau" <tunderbar@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b550f406.0410041826.2199c1d7@posting.google.com...
> Parents who put their kids on vegetarian diets should be
> charged with child abuse and sterilized.

To the contrary..

J Am Diet Assoc. 2003;103:748-765.

The paper reviewed the latest scientific data related to key
nutrients for vegetarians, including protein, iron, zinc,
calcium, vitamin D, riboflavin, vitamin B-12, vitamin A, n-3
fatty acids, and iodine. They concluded 'A vegetarian,
including vegan, diet can meet current recommendations for all
of these nutrients. In some cases, use of fortified foods or
supplements can be helpful in meeting recommendations for
individual nutrients.'

'Well-planned vegan and other types of vegetarian diets are
appropriate for all stages of the life cycle, including during
pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, and adolescence.
Vegetarian diets offer a number of nutritional benefits,
including lower levels of saturated fat, cholesterol, and
animal protein as well as higher levels of carbohydrates,
fiber, magnesium, potassium, folate, and antioxidants such as
vitamins C and E and phytochemicals. Vegetarians have been
reported to have lower body mass indices than non-vegetarians,
as well as lower rates of death from ischemic heart disease;
vegetarians also show lower blood cholesterol levels; lower
blood pressure; and lower rates of hypertension, type 2
diabetes, and prostate and colon cancer.'

Their advice to Health professionals is "Dietetics
professionals have a responsibility to support and encourage
those who express an interest in consuming a vegetarian diet."
. . . http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?ne-
wsid=13478

Pearl

Tue, Oct-05-04, 06:16

"tcomeau" <tunderbar@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b550f406.0410041825.283eba65@posting.google.com...
> Parents who put their kids on vegetarian diets should be
> charged with child abuse and sterilized.

To the contrary..

J Am Diet Assoc. 2003;103:748-765.

The paper reviewed the latest scientific data related to key
nutrients for vegetarians, including protein, iron, zinc,
calcium, vitamin D, riboflavin, vitamin B-12, vitamin A, n-3
fatty acids, and iodine. They concluded 'A vegetarian,
including vegan, diet can meet current recommendations for all
of these nutrients. In some cases, use of fortified foods or
supplements can be helpful in meeting recommendations for
individual nutrients.'

'Well-planned vegan and other types of vegetarian diets are
appropriate for all stages of the life cycle, including during
pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, and adolescence.
Vegetarian diets offer a number of nutritional benefits,
including lower levels of saturated fat, cholesterol, and
animal protein as well as higher levels of carbohydrates,
fiber, magnesium, potassium, folate, and antioxidants such as
vitamins C and E and phytochemicals. Vegetarians have been
reported to have lower body mass indices than non-vegetarians,
as well as lower rates of death from ischemic heart disease;
vegetarians also show lower blood cholesterol levels; lower
blood pressure; and lower rates of hypertension, type 2
diabetes, and prostate and colon cancer.'

Their advice to Health professionals is "Dietetics
professionals have a responsibility to support and encourage
those who express an interest in consuming a vegetarian diet."
. . . http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?ne-
wsid=13478

Tue, Oct-05-04, 19:17

"harmony" <aka@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<10m3j1hp84tiv1e@corp.supernews.com>...

<snip>

> is it any wonder american children perform poorly compared
> to other countries?

"The effect of vitamin-mineral supplementation on the
intelligence of American schoolchildren: a randomized,
double-blind placebo-controlled trial.

Schoenthaler SJ, Bier ID, Young K, Nichols D, Jansenns S.

Department of Sociology and Criminal Justice, California State
University, Stanislaus, Turlock 95380, USA.
stephens@volcano.net

CONTEXT: Many medical, nutrition, and education professionals
have long suspected that poor diet impairs the academic
performance of Western schoolchildren; academic performance
often improves after improved diet. However, others have
suggested that such academic gains may be due to psychologic
effects rather than nutrition. To resolve this issue, two
independent research teams conducted randomized trials in
which children were given placebos or low-dose vitamin-mineral
tablets designed to raise nutrient intake to the equivalent of
a well-balanced diet. Both teams reported significantly
greater gains in nonverbal intelligence among the supplemented
groups. The findings were important because of the apparent
inadequacy of diet they revealed and the magnitude of the
potential for increased intelligence. However, none of the ten
subsequent replications, or the two original trials, were
without limitations leaving this issue in controversy.
OBJECTIVES: To determine if schoolchildren who consume
low-dose vitamin-mineral tablets will have a significantly
larger increase in nonverbal intelligence than children who
consume placebos in a study that overcomes the primary
criticisms directed at the previous 12 controlled trials.
DESIGN: A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial using
stratified randomization within each teacher's class based on
preintervention nonverbal intelligence. SETTINGS AND SUBJECTS:
Two "working class," primarily Hispanic, elementary schools in
Phoenix, Arizona, participated in the study. Slightly more
than half the teachers in each school distributed the tablets
daily to 245 schoolchildren aged 6 to 12 years. INTERVENTION:
Daily vitamin-mineral supplementation at 50% of the U.S. daily
recommended allowance (RDA) for 3 months versus placebo.
OUTCOME MEASURES: Post-test nonverbal IQ, as measured by the
Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised (WISC-R),
while controlling for pretest nonverbal IQ as a covariate.
FOUR MAIN RESULTS: First, a significant difference of 2.5 IQ
points (95% CI: 1.85-3.15) was found between 125 children
given active tablets and 120 children given placebo tablets (p
= 0.038). Second, this finding is consistent with the mean 3.2
IQ point net gain found in the 12 similar but less rigorous
studies. Third, a significantly higher proportion of children
in the active group gained 15 or more IQ points when compared
to the placebo group (p < 0.01). Fourth, although 81 matched
pairs produced no difference at all in nonverbal IQ gain, the
modest 2.5 IQ point net gain for the entire sample can be
explained by the remaining 24 children who took active
tablets, and had a 16 point higher net gain in IQ than the
remaining 19 placebo controls. CONCLUSIONS: This study
confirms that vitamin-mineral supplementation modestly raised
the nonverbal intelligence of some groups of Western
schoolchildren by 2 to 3 points but not that of most Western
schoolchildren, presumably because the majority were already
adequately nourished. This study also confirms that
vitamin-mineral supplementation markedly raises the non-verbal
intelligence of a minority of Western schoolchildren,
presumably because they were too poorly nourished before
supplementation for optimal brain function. Because nonverbal
intelligence is closely associated with academic performance,
it follows that schools with children who consume substandard
diets should find it difficult to produce academic performance
equal to those schools with children who consume diets that
come closer to providing the nutrients suggested in the U.S.
RDA. The parents of schoolchildren whose academic performance
is substandard would be well advised to seek a nutritionally
oriented physician for assessment of their children's
nutritional status as a possible etiology."

http://tinyurl.com/5xayc

<snip>

In addition, the nutritional quality of food in the grocery
stores in American cities is often significantly lower in the
poorer sections of town as compared to those stores in the
more well-to-do sections. It's interesting to note that in
Louisville, KY, for example, the most profitable section of
the grocery stores in the wealthier neighborhoods is the fresh
cut flowers section. In the poorer neighborhoods, the pharmacy
outgains all other departments.

You'll have to search mighty hard for anything resembling
fresh greens in these poorer neighborhoods, and if you do find
them, their quality is likely to be bottom of the barrel.

Tcomeau

Tue, Oct-05-04, 19:17

"pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
news:<cjtrab$vdg$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> "tcomeau" <tunderbar@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:b550f406.0410041825.283eba65@posting.google.com...
> > Parents who put their kids on vegetarian diets should be
> > charged with child abuse and sterilized.
>
> To the contrary..
>
> J Am Diet Assoc. 2003;103:748-765.
>
> The paper reviewed the latest scientific data related to key
> nutrients for vegetarians, including protein, iron, zinc,
> calcium, vitamin D, riboflavin, vitamin B-12, vitamin A, n-3
> fatty acids, and iodine. They concluded 'A vegetarian,
> including vegan, diet can meet current recommendations for
> all of these nutrients. In some cases, use of fortified
> foods or supplements can be helpful in meeting
> recommendations for individual nutrients.'
>
> 'Well-planned vegan and other types of vegetarian diets are
> appropriate for all stages of the life cycle, including
> during pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, and
> adolescence. Vegetarian diets offer a number of nutritional
> benefits, including lower levels of saturated fat,
> cholesterol, and animal protein as well as higher levels of
> carbohydrates, fiber, magnesium, potassium, folate, and
> antioxidants such as vitamins C and E and phytochemicals.
> Vegetarians have been reported to have lower body mass
> indices than non-vegetarians, as well as lower rates of
> death from ischemic heart disease; vegetarians also show
> lower blood cholesterol levels; lower blood pressure; and
> lower rates of hypertension, type 2 diabetes, and prostate
> and colon cancer.'
>
> Their advice to Health professionals is "Dietetics
> professionals have a responsibility to support and
> encourage those who express an interest in consuming a
> vegetarian diet."
> . . . http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?news-
> id=13478

Bullshit.

TC

Pearl

Tue, Oct-05-04, 19:17

"tcomeau" <tunderbar@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b550f406.0410050603.17295a99@posting.google.com...
> "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
> news:<cjtrab$vdg$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> > "tcomeau" <tunderbar@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:b550f406.0410041825.283eba65@posting.google.com...
> > > Parents who put their kids on vegetarian diets should be
> > > charged with child abuse and sterilized.
> >
> > To the contrary..
> >
> > J Am Diet Assoc. 2003;103:748-765.
> >
> > The paper reviewed the latest scientific data related to
> > key nutrients for vegetarians, including protein, iron,
> > zinc, calcium, vitamin D, riboflavin, vitamin B-12,
> > vitamin A, n-3 fatty acids, and iodine. They concluded 'A
> > vegetarian, including vegan, diet can meet current
> > recommendations for all of these nutrients. In some cases,
> > use of fortified foods or supplements can be helpful in
> > meeting recommendations for individual nutrients.'
> >
> > 'Well-planned vegan and other types of vegetarian diets
> > are appropriate for all stages of the life cycle,
> > including during pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood,
> > and adolescence. Vegetarian diets offer a number of
> > nutritional benefits, including lower levels of saturated
> > fat, cholesterol, and animal protein as well as higher
> > levels of carbohydrates, fiber, magnesium, potassium,
> > folate, and antioxidants such as vitamins C and E and
> > phytochemicals. Vegetarians have been reported to have
> > lower body mass indices than non-vegetarians, as well as
> > lower rates of death from ischemic heart disease;
> > vegetarians also show lower blood cholesterol levels;
> > lower blood pressure; and lower rates of hypertension,
> > type 2 diabetes, and prostate and colon cancer.'
> >
> > Their advice to Health professionals is "Dietetics
> > professionals have a responsibility to support and
> > encourage those who express an interest in consuming a
> > vegetarian diet."
> > . . . http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?ne-
> > wsid=13478
>
> Bullshit.

Bullshit.

> TC

Dutch

Tue, Oct-05-04, 19:17

"pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> "tcomeau" <tunderbar@hotmail.com> wrote

>> > Their advice to Health professionals is "Dietetics
>> > professionals have a responsibility to support and
>> > encourage those who express an interest in consuming a
>> > vegetarian diet."
>> > . . . http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?n-
>> > ewsid=13478
>>
>> Bullshit.
>
> Bullshit.

It's bullshit for vegans to presume to give advice to health
and dietetic professionals.

If that website were responsible they would have included more
of a disclaimer when printing an opinion piece like this,
which typical of pro-vegan literature, liberally mixes fact
and fiction. In this case the tactic used is the vegan's
favorite ploy of addressing a dietary deficiency in fresh
fruits and vegetables, a valid health issue, by suggesting
that the diet must be composed of ALL fruit and vegetables.
And don't bother pasting those tired studies that suggest NO
meat is the ideal amount, because they are not representative
of most research on diets.

Pearl

Wed, Oct-06-04, 19:16

"Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote in message
news:imE8d.639534$gE.122467@pd7tw3no...
>
> "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> > "tcomeau" <tunderbar@hotmail.com> wrote
>
> >> > Their advice to Health professionals is "Dietetics
> >> > professionals have a responsibility to support and
> >> > encourage those who express an interest in consuming a
> >> > vegetarian diet."
> >> > . . . http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php-
> >> > ?newsid=13478
> >>
> >> Bullshit.
> >
> > Bullshit.
>
> It's bullshit for vegans to presume to give advice to health
> and dietetic professionals.

The American Dietetic Association and Dietitians of Canada
are vegans?

--restore-- J Am Diet Assoc. 2003;103:748-765.

The paper reviewed the latest scientific data related to key
nutrients for vegetarians, including protein, iron, zinc,
calcium, vitamin D, riboflavin, vitamin B-12, vitamin A, n-3
fatty acids, and iodine. They concluded 'A vegetarian,
including vegan, diet can meet current recommendations for all
of these nutrients. In some cases, use of fortified foods or
supplements can be helpful in meeting recommendations for
individual nutrients.'

'Well-planned vegan and other types of vegetarian diets are
appropriate for all stages of the life cycle, including during
pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, and adolescence.
Vegetarian diets offer a number of nutritional benefits,
including lower levels of saturated fat, cholesterol, and
animal protein as well as higher levels of carbohydrates,
fiber, magnesium, potassium, folate, and antioxidants such as
vitamins C and E and phytochemicals. Vegetarians have been
reported to have lower body mass indices than non-vegetarians,
as well as lower rates of death from ischemic heart disease;
vegetarians also show lower blood cholesterol levels; lower
blood pressure; and lower rates of hypertension, type 2
diabetes, and prostate and colon cancer.'
---

> If that website were responsible they would have included
> more of a disclaimer when printing an opinion piece like
> this, which typical of pro-vegan literature, liberally mixes
> fact and fiction. In this case the tactic used is the
> vegan's favorite ploy of addressing a dietary deficiency in
> fresh fruits and vegetables, a valid health issue, by
> suggesting that the diet must be composed of ALL fruit and
> vegetables. And don't bother pasting those tired studies
> that suggest NO meat is the ideal amount, because they are
> not representative of most research on diets.

More BS.

Dutch

Wed, Oct-06-04, 19:16

"pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote
> >
> > "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> > > "tcomeau" <tunderbar@hotmail.com> wrote
> >
> > >> > Their advice to Health professionals is "Dietetics
> > >> > professionals have a responsibility to support and
> > >> > encourage those who express an interest in consuming
> > >> > a vegetarian diet."
> > >> > . . . http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.p-
> > >> > hp?newsid=13478
> > >>
> > >> Bullshit.
> > >
> > > Bullshit.
> >
> > It's bullshit for vegans to presume to give advice to
> > health and
dietetic
> > professionals.
>
> The American Dietetic Association and Dietitians of Canada
> are vegans?

No dimwit, the Vegan Society are vegans. "This article comes
from The Vegan Society"

> --restore-- J Am Diet Assoc. 2003;103:748-765.
>
> The paper reviewed the latest scientific data related to key
> nutrients for vegetarians, including protein, iron, zinc,
> calcium, vitamin D, riboflavin, vitamin B-12, vitamin A, n-3
> fatty acids, and iodine. They concluded 'A vegetarian,
> including vegan, diet can meet current recommendations for
> all of these nutrients. In some cases, use of fortified
> foods or supplements can be helpful in meeting
> recommendations for individual nutrients.'

"*Can* meet current recommendations..." Get that, dipshit?
**Can meet**, meaning might not in many cases, but **can**.
Nobody disputes that.

> 'Well-planned vegan and other types of vegetarian diets are
> appropriate for all stages of the life cycle, including
> during pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, and
> adolescence. Vegetarian diets offer a number of nutritional
> benefits, including lower levels of saturated fat,
> cholesterol, and animal protein as well as higher levels of
> carbohydrates, fiber, magnesium, potassium, folate, and
> antioxidants such as vitamins C and E and phytochemicals.
> Vegetarians have been reported to have lower body mass
> indices than non-vegetarians, as well as lower rates of
> death from ischemic heart disease; vegetarians also show
> lower blood cholesterol levels; lower blood pressure; and
> lower rates of hypertension, type 2 diabetes, and prostate
> and colon cancer.'

Where is that particular text coming from, the ADA paper, or
the Vegan Society? It's difficult to tell, but suspect
statements like "Vegetarians have been reported to have lower
body mass indices than non-vegetarians..." beg a lot of
questions, such as reported by whom, when, according to what
study, which vegetarians, compared to which non-vegetarians?
It reeks of vegan sophistry, not a scientific report.

> ---
>
> > If that website were responsible they would have included
> > more of a disclaimer when printing an opinion piece like
> > this, which typical of pro-vegan literature, liberally
> > mixes fact and fiction. In this case the tactic used is
> > the vegan's favorite ploy of addressing a dietary
deficiency
> > in fresh fruits and vegetables, a valid health issue, by
> > suggesting that
the
> > diet must be composed of ALL fruit and vegetables. And
> > don't bother
pasting
> > those tired studies that suggest NO meat is the ideal
> > amount, because
they
> > are not representative of most research on diets.
>
> More BS.

Quit promoting veganism with bullshit, you are not doing it
any favours.

Pearl

Wed, Oct-06-04, 19:16

"Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote in message
news:10m88pmju39nmcf@news.supernews.com...
>
> "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> > "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote
> > >
> > > "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> > > > "tcomeau" <tunderbar@hotmail.com> wrote
> > >
> > > >> > Their advice to Health professionals is "Dietetics
> > > >> > professionals have a responsibility to support and
> > > >> > encourage those who express an interest in
> > > >> > consuming a vegetarian diet."
> > > >> > . . . http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews-
> > > >> > .php?newsid=13478
> > > >>
> > > >> Bullshit.
> > > >
> > > > Bullshit.
> > >
> > > It's bullshit for vegans to presume to give advice to
> > > health and dietetic professionals.
> >
> > The American Dietetic Association and Dietitians of Canada
> > are vegans?
>
> No dimwit, the Vegan Society are vegans. "This article comes
> from The Vegan Society"

Caught out in your ignorance again, dimwit.

> > --restore-- J Am Diet Assoc. 2003;103:748-765.
> >
> > The paper reviewed the latest scientific data related to
> > key nutrients for vegetarians, including protein, iron,
> > zinc, calcium, vitamin D, riboflavin, vitamin B-12,
> > vitamin A, n-3 fatty acids, and iodine. They concluded 'A
> > vegetarian, including vegan, diet can meet current
> > recommendations for all of these nutrients. In some cases,
> > use of fortified foods or supplements can be helpful in
> > meeting recommendations for individual nutrients.'
>
> "*Can* meet current recommendations..." Get that, dipshit?
> **Can meet**, meaning might not in many cases, but **can**.
> Nobody disputes that.

'Nobody'? Suggest you review the thread, dipshit.

> > 'Well-planned vegan and other types of vegetarian diets
> > are appropriate for all stages of the life cycle,
> > including during pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood,
> > and adolescence. Vegetarian diets offer a number of
> > nutritional benefits, including lower levels of saturated
> > fat, cholesterol, and animal protein as well as higher
> > levels of carbohydrates, fiber, magnesium, potassium,
> > folate, and antioxidants such as vitamins C and E and
> > phytochemicals. Vegetarians have been reported to have
> > lower body mass indices than non-vegetarians, as well as
> > lower rates of death from ischemic heart disease;
> > vegetarians also show lower blood cholesterol levels;
> > lower blood pressure; and lower rates of hypertension,
> > type 2 diabetes, and prostate and colon cancer.'
>
> Where is that particular text coming from, the ADA paper, or
> the Vegan Society? It's difficult to tell, but suspect
> statements like "Vegetarians have been reported to have
> lower body mass indices than non-vegetarians..." beg a lot
> of questions, such as reported by whom, when, according to
> what study, which vegetarians, compared to which
> non-vegetarians? It reeks of vegan sophistry, not a
> scientific report.

Meatarian sophistry.

<..

Dutch

Thu, Oct-07-04, 06:16

"pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
news:ck1v10$64h$1@kermit.esat.net...
> "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote in message
> news:10m88pmju39nmcf@news.supernews.com...
>>
>> "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
>> > "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote
>> > >
>> > > "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
>> > > > "tcomeau" <tunderbar@hotmail.com> wrote
>> > >
>> > > >> > Their advice to Health professionals is "Dietetics
>> > > >> > professionals have a responsibility to support and
>> > > >> > encourage those who express an interest in
>> > > >> > consuming a vegetarian diet."
>> > > >> > . . . http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnew-
>> > > >> > s.php?newsid=13478
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Bullshit.
>> > > >
>> > > > Bullshit.
>> > >
>> > > It's bullshit for vegans to presume to give advice to
>> > > health and dietetic professionals.
>> >
>> > The American Dietetic Association and Dietitians of
>> > Canada are vegans?
>>
>> No dimwit, the Vegan Society are vegans. "This article
>> comes from The Vegan Society"
>
> Caught out in your ignorance again, dimwit.

Read the damn thing.

quote

"This article comes from The Vegan Society"

unquote

>> > --restore-- J Am Diet Assoc. 2003;103:748-765.
>> >
>> > The paper reviewed the latest scientific data related to
>> > key nutrients for vegetarians, including protein, iron,
>> > zinc, calcium, vitamin D, riboflavin, vitamin B-12,
>> > vitamin A, n-3 fatty acids, and iodine. They concluded 'A
>> > vegetarian, including vegan, diet can meet current
>> > recommendations for all of these nutrients. In some
>> > cases, use of fortified foods or supplements can be
>> > helpful in meeting recommendations for individual
>> > nutrients.'
>>
>> "*Can* meet current recommendations..." Get that, dipshit?
>> **Can meet**, meaning might not in many cases, but **can**.
>> Nobody disputes that.
>
> 'Nobody'? Suggest you review the thread, dipshit.

OK, almost nobody.

>> Where is that particular text coming from, the ADA paper,
>> or the Vegan Society? It's difficult to tell, but suspect
>> statements like "Vegetarians have been reported to have
>> lower body mass indices than non-vegetarians..." beg a lot
>> of questions, such as reported by whom, when, according to
>> what study, which vegetarians, compared to which
>> non-vegetarians? It reeks of vegan sophistry, not a
>> scientific report.
>
> Meatarian sophistry.

Rubbish

Scientific observers do not use vague, passive weasel phrases
like "it has been reported", they say where and when and how.

Pearl

Thu, Oct-07-04, 06:16

"Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote in message
news:mX09d.649229$gE.260217@pd7tw3no...
>
> "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
> news:ck1v10$64h$1@kermit.esat.net...
> > "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote in message
> > news:10m88pmju39nmcf@news.supernews.com...
> >>
> >> "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> >> > "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote
> >> > >
> >> > > "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> >> > > > "tcomeau" <tunderbar@hotmail.com> wrote
> >> > >
> >> > > >> > Their advice to Health professionals is
> >> > > >> > "Dietetics professionals have a responsibility
> >> > > >> > to support and encourage those who express an
> >> > > >> > interest in consuming a vegetarian diet."
> >> > > >> > . . . http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicaln-
> >> > > >> > ews.php?newsid=13478
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> Bullshit.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Bullshit.
> >> > >
> >> > > It's bullshit for vegans to presume to give advice to
> >> > > health and dietetic professionals.
> >> >
> >> > The American Dietetic Association and Dietitians of
> >> > Canada are vegans?
> >>
> >> No dimwit, the Vegan Society are vegans. "This article
> >> comes from The Vegan Society"
> >
> > Caught out in your ignorance again, dimwit.
>
> Read the damn thing.
>
> quote
>
> "This article comes from The Vegan Society"
>
> unquote

You should have read it,... specifically what you SNIPPED:

> >> > --restore-- J Am Diet Assoc. 2003;103:748-765.
> >> >
> >> > The paper reviewed the latest scientific data related
> >> > to key nutrients for vegetarians, including protein,
> >> > iron, zinc, calcium, vitamin D, riboflavin, vitamin
> >> > B-12, vitamin A, n-3 fatty acids, and iodine. They
> >> > concluded 'A vegetarian, including vegan, diet can meet
> >> > current recommendations for all of these nutrients. In
> >> > some cases, use of fortified foods or supplements can
> >> > be helpful in meeting recommendations for individual
> >> > nutrients.'
> >>
> >> "*Can* meet current recommendations..." Get that,
> >> dipshit? **Can meet**, meaning might not in many cases,
> >> but **can**. Nobody disputes that.
> >
> > 'Nobody'? Suggest you review the thread, dipshit.
>
> OK, almost nobody.
>
> >> Where is that particular text coming from, the ADA paper,
> >> or the Vegan Society? It's difficult to tell, but suspect
> >> statements like "Vegetarians have been reported to have
> >> lower body mass indices than non-vegetarians..." beg a
> >> lot of questions, such as reported by whom, when,
> >> according to what study, which vegetarians, compared to
> >> which non-vegetarians? It reeks of vegan sophistry, not a
> >> scientific report.
> >
> > Meatarian sophistry.
>
> Rubbish

That too.

> Scientific observers do not use vague, passive weasel
> phrases like "it has been reported", they say where and when
> and how.

http://www.eatright.org/Public/GovernmentAffairs/92_17084.cfm

Get a proper job, ditch.

Dutch

Thu, Oct-07-04, 06:16

"pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote >>

[..]

>> Read the damn thing.
>>
>> quote
>>
>> "This article comes from The Vegan Society"
>>
>> unquote
>
> You should have read it,... specifically what you SNIPPED:

I did read it. It starts with "This article comes from The
Vegan Society"

[..]
>> Scientific observers do not use vague, passive weasel
>> phrases like "it has been reported", they say where and
>> when and how.
>
> http://www.eatright.org/Public/GovernmentAffairs/92_1-
> 7084.cfm

That's not science, it's generalities, it's just poor writing.
When they say "Vegetarians have been reported to have lower
body mass indices than non-vegetarians..." who are they
talking about? Which non-vegetarians, what exactly did the
non-vegetarians in this study eat? Where is this information
coming from? These questions demand answers. Healthy
vegetarian diets are better than deficient non-vegetarian
diets, of course, but are poor vegetarian diets better than
healthy non-vegetarian diets? Of course not, not even you
believe that. Well, maybe a nut like you..

This Association strongly supports including meat in a
balanced diet by the way.

Jan

Thu, Oct-07-04, 19:17

pearl wrote:

> > Healthy vegetarian diets are better than deficient
> > non-vegetarian diets, of course, but are poor vegetarian
> > diets better than healthy non-vegetarian diets? Of
course not,
> > not even you believe that. Well, maybe a nut like you..
>
> There's no such thing as a 'healthy non-vegetarian diet'!

I think that there is ample of evidence about the health
benefits of vegetarian diets. However, I think that there are
benefits in fish eating or at least supplementing with fish
oils. In the studies of vegetarian diets it has been noticed
that the status of omega-3 would improve by supplementing with
direct EPA and DHA. There is also some benefit in taking
direct EPA/DHA instead of alpha linolenic acid as the latter
has been connected with increased prostate cancer risk.

Jan

Harmony

Thu, Oct-07-04, 19:17

it's a great surprise that the dept of education, charged with
school lunch programs, is totally uneducated or out of sync
with the dept of public health or the surgeon general. well,
may be not since this administration is always short on
intellegence and long on "leading".

"pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
news:cjtr9v$vdf$1@kermit.esat.net...
> "tcomeau" <tunderbar@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b550f406.0410041826.2199c1d7@posting.google.com...
> > Parents who put their kids on vegetarian diets should be
> > charged with child abuse and sterilized.
>
> To the contrary..
>
> J Am Diet Assoc. 2003;103:748-765.
>
> The paper reviewed the latest scientific data related to key
> nutrients for vegetarians, including protein, iron, zinc,
> calcium, vitamin D, riboflavin, vitamin B-12, vitamin A, n-3
> fatty acids, and iodine. They concluded 'A vegetarian,
> including vegan, diet can meet current recommendations for
> all of these nutrients. In some cases, use of fortified
> foods or supplements can be helpful in meeting
> recommendations for individual nutrients.'
>
> 'Well-planned vegan and other types of vegetarian diets are
> appropriate for all stages of the life cycle, including
> during pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, and
> adolescence. Vegetarian diets offer a number of nutritional
> benefits, including lower levels of saturated fat,
> cholesterol, and animal protein as well as higher levels of
> carbohydrates, fiber, magnesium, potassium, folate, and
> antioxidants such as vitamins C and E and phytochemicals.
> Vegetarians have been reported to have lower body mass
> indices than non-vegetarians, as well as lower rates of
> death from ischemic heart disease; vegetarians also show
> lower blood cholesterol levels; lower blood pressure; and
> lower rates of hypertension, type 2 diabetes, and prostate
> and colon cancer.'
>
> Their advice to Health professionals is "Dietetics
> professionals have a responsibility to support and
> encourage those who express an interest in consuming a
> vegetarian diet."
> . . . http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?news-
> id=13478

Pearl

Thu, Oct-07-04, 19:17

"harmony" <aka@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:10matbfnfs67qaf@corp.supernews.com...
> it's a great surprise that the dept of education, charged
> with school lunch programs, is totally uneducated or out of
> sync with the dept of public health or the surgeon general.
> well, may be not since this administration is always short
> on intellegence and long on "leading".

"mis". .. Pertinent info' here;
http://www.rense.com/general45/bll.htm .

<.

Dutch

Thu, Oct-07-04, 19:17

"pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
news:ck41ho$p8i$1@kermit.esat.net...
> "harmony" <aka@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:10matbfnfs67qaf@corp.supernews.com...
>> it's a great surprise that the dept of education, charged
>> with school lunch programs, is totally uneducated or out of
>> sync with the dept of public health or the surgeon general.
>> well, may be not since this administration is always short
>> on intellegence and long on "leading".
>
> "mis". .. Pertinent info' here;
> http://www.rense.com/general45/bll.htm .

LOL! Jeff Rense is professional conspiracy theorist and
nutcase. You two are the perfect dupes for charlatans like
him.

Pearl

Thu, Oct-07-04, 19:17

"Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote in message
news:aGh9d.657304$gE.324610@pd7tw3no...
>
> "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
> news:ck41ho$p8i$1@kermit.esat.net...
> > "harmony" <aka@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:10matbfnfs67qaf@corp.supernews.com...
> >> it's a great surprise that the dept of education, charged
> >> with school lunch programs, is totally uneducated or out
> >> of sync with the dept of public health or the surgeon
> >> general. well, may be not since this administration is
> >> always short on intellegence and long on "leading".
> >
> > "mis". .. Pertinent info' here;
> > http://www.rense.com/general45/bll.htm .
>
> LOL! Jeff Rense is professional conspiracy theorist and
> nutcase. You two are the perfect dupes for charlatans
> like him.

Ad hominem nonsense.

Pearl

Thu, Oct-07-04, 19:17

"Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote in message
news:ih39d.12005$a41.11350@pd7tw2no...
> "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> > "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote >>
>
> [..]
>
> >> Read the damn thing.
> >>
> >> quote
> >>
> >> "This article comes from The Vegan Society"
> >>
> >> unquote
> >
> > You should have read it,... specifically what you SNIPPED:
>
> I did read it. It starts with "This article comes from The
> Vegan Society"

And snipped again..

> [..]
> >> Scientific observers do not use vague, passive weasel
> >> phrases like "it has been reported", they say where and
> >> when and how.
> >
> > http://www.eatright.org/Public/GovernmentAffairs/92_170-
> > 84.cfm
>
> That's not science, it's generalities, it's just poor
> writing.

Timewaster.

> When they say "Vegetarians have been reported to have lower
> body mass indices than non-vegetarians..." who are they
> talking about? Which non-vegetarians, what exactly did the
> non-vegetarians in this study eat? Where is this information
> coming from? These questions demand answers.

These 'answers' have been posted umpteen times in this NG.
Where were you? Too busy spinning your webs of deceit?

> Healthy vegetarian diets are better than deficient
> non-vegetarian diets, of course, but are poor vegetarian
> diets better than healthy non-vegetarian diets? Of course
> not, not even you believe that. Well, maybe a nut like you..

There's no such thing as a 'healthy non-vegetarian diet'!

> This Association strongly supports including meat in a
> balanced diet by the way.

Either they or you are confused..

'Vegetarians have been reported to have lower body mass
indices than nonvegetarians, as well as lower rates of death
from ischemic heart disease; vegetarians also show lower blood
cholesterol levels; lower blood pressure; and lower rates of
hypertension, type 2 diabetes, and prostate and colon cancer.
'
http://www.eatright.org/Public/GovernmentAffairs/92_17084.cfm

Thu, Oct-07-04, 19:17

"pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
news:<ck3bgl$iie$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote in message
> news:ih39d.12005$a41.11350@pd7tw2no...
> > "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> > > "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote >>

<snip>

> > Healthy vegetarian diets are better than deficient
> > non-vegetarian diets, of course, but are poor vegetarian
> > diets better than healthy non-vegetarian diets? Of
> > course not, not even you believe that. Well, maybe a nut
> > like you..
>
> There's no such thing as a 'healthy non-vegetarian diet'!

Of course there is. A diet consisting of mostly fresh fruits,
vegetables and grains, supplemented with moderate amounts of
high quality meat, is perfectly healthy. A typical
meat-centric, western diet is not healthy at all, but to say
that any and all meat eating is unhealthy smacks of dogma.

Dutch

Thu, Oct-07-04, 19:17

"pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote
> > "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> > > "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote >>
> >
> > [..]
> >
> > >> Read the damn thing.
> > >>
> > >> quote
> > >>
> > >> "This article comes from The Vegan Society"
> > >>
> > >> unquote
> > >
> > > You should have read it,... specifically what you
> > > SNIPPED:
> >
> > I did read it. It starts with "This article comes from
> > The Vegan
Society"
>
> And snipped again..

So what? I am under no obligation to requrgitate the text that
YOU copy/paste into YOUR posts.

> > [..]
> > >> Scientific observers do not use vague, passive weasel
> > >> phrases like
"it
> > >> has been reported", they say where and when and how.
> > >
> > > http://www.eatright.org/Public/GovernmentAffairs/92_170-
> > > 84.cfm
> >
> > That's not science, it's generalities, it's just poor
> > writing.
>
> Timewaster.

To the degree that I spend time trying to reason with
you, I agree.

> > When they say "Vegetarians have been reported to have
> > lower body mass indices than non-vegetarians..." who are
> > they talking about? Which non-vegetarians,
what
> > exactly did the non-vegetarians in this study eat? Where
> > is this
information
> > coming from? These questions demand answers.
>
> These 'answers' have been posted umpteen times in this NG.

That fails to address the question. There are thousands of
studies on nutrition, why should we select the few that
reinforce your extreme bias and disregard all the rest?

> > Healthy vegetarian diets are better than deficient
> > non-vegetarian diets, of course, but are poor vegetarian
> > diets better than healthy non-vegetarian diets? Of course
not,
> > not even you believe that. Well, maybe a nut like you..
>
> There's no such thing as a 'healthy non-vegetarian diet'!

False. Thank you for proving my point.
>
> > This Association strongly supports including meat in a
> > balanced diet by
the
> > way.
>
> Either they or you are confused..

The ADA is confused and you have all the answers.. yea right.

-pffft-

Dutch

Thu, Oct-07-04, 19:17

"ta" <ta33@bellsouth.net> wrote
> "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
>> "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote

>
> <snip>
>
>> > Healthy vegetarian diets are better than deficient
>> > non-vegetarian diets, of course, but are poor vegetarian
>> > diets better than healthy non-vegetarian diets? Of course
>> > not, not even you believe that. Well, maybe a nut like
>> > you..
>>
>> There's no such thing as a 'healthy non-vegetarian diet'!
>
> Of course there is. A diet consisting of mostly fresh
> fruits, vegetables and grains, supplemented with moderate
> amounts of high quality meat, is perfectly healthy. A
> typical meat-centric, western diet is not healthy at all,

I could not have said it better...

> but to say that any and all meat eating is unhealthy smacks
> of dogma.

Because that's what it is.

Pearl

Thu, Oct-07-04, 19:17

"ta" <ta33@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:c5c0e6e6.0410071140.341f97e4@posting.google.com...
> "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
> news:<ck3bgl$iie$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> > "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote in message
> > news:ih39d.12005$a41.11350@pd7tw2no...
> > > "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> > > > "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote >>
>
> <snip>
>
> > > Healthy vegetarian diets are better than deficient
> > > non-vegetarian diets, of course, but are poor vegetarian
> > > diets better than healthy non-vegetarian diets? Of
> > > course not, not even you believe that. Well, maybe a nut
> > > like you..
> >
> > There's no such thing as a 'healthy non-vegetarian diet'!
>
> Of course there is. A diet consisting of mostly fresh
> fruits, vegetables and grains, supplemented with moderate
> amounts of high quality meat, is perfectly healthy. A
> typical meat-centric, western diet is not healthy at all,
> but to say that any and all meat eating is unhealthy smacks
> of dogma.

'.. 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/Nov98/thermogenesis_paper.html

How much of a disease producing 'food' is healthy? NONE!

Pearl

Thu, Oct-07-04, 19:17

"Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote in message
news:10mathh2brk4la2@news.supernews.com...
> "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> > "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote
> > > "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> > > > "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote >>
> > >
> > > [..]
> > >
> > > >> Read the damn thing.
> > > >>
> > > >> quote
> > > >>
> > > >> "This article comes from The Vegan Society"
> > > >>
> > > >> unquote
> > > >
> > > > You should have read it,... specifically what you
> > > > SNIPPED:
> > >
> > > I did read it. It starts with "This article comes from
> > > The Vegan
> Society"
> >
> > And snipped again..
>
> So what? I am under no obligation to requrgitate the text
> that YOU copy/paste into YOUR posts.

Twist away, little snake.

> > > [..]
> > > >> Scientific observers do not use vague, passive weasel
> > > >> phrases like
> "it
> > > >> has been reported", they say where and when and how.
> > > >
> > > > http://www.eatright.org/Public/GovernmentAffairs/92_1-
> > > > 7084.cfm
> > >
> > > That's not science, it's generalities, it's just poor
> > > writing.
> >
> > Timewaster.
>
> To the degree that I spend time trying to reason with you,
> I agree.

You're as delusional as ever.

> > > When they say "Vegetarians have been reported to have
> > > lower body mass indices than non-vegetarians..." who are
> > > they talking about? Which non-vegetarians, what exactly
> > > did the non-vegetarians in this study eat? Where is this
> > > information coming from? These questions demand answers.
> >
> > These 'answers' have been posted umpteen times in this NG.
>
> That fails to address the question. There are thousands of
> studies on nutrition, why should we select the few that
> reinforce your extreme bias and disregard all the rest?

I challenge you to present a study abstract showing otherwise.

> > > Healthy vegetarian diets are better than deficient
> > > non-vegetarian diets, of course, but are poor vegetarian
> > > diets better than healthy non-vegetarian diets? Of
> > > course not, not even you believe that. Well, maybe a nut
> > > like you..
> >
> > There's no such thing as a 'healthy non-vegetarian diet'!
>
> False. Thank you for proving my point.

'.. 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/Nov98/thermogenesis_paper.html

> > > This Association strongly supports including meat in a
> > > balanced diet by the way.
> >
> > Either they or you are confused..
>
> The ADA is confused and you have all the answers.. yea
> right.

IF that's what *they* say. How about you provide a cite?

> -pffft-

Of course, dodge. -restore- 'Vegetarians have been reported to
have lower body mass indices than nonvegetarians, as well as
lower rates of death from ischemic heart disease; vegetarians
also show lower blood cholesterol levels; lower blood
pressure; and lower rates of hypertension, type 2 diabetes,
and prostate and colon cancer. '
http://www.eatright.org/Public/GovernmentAffairs/92_17084.cfm

Dutch

Thu, Oct-07-04, 19:17

"pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote >

> How much of a disease producing 'food' is healthy? NONE!

Nobody in their right mind could look at all the
accumulated knowledge about food and conclude that meat in
any amount is poison.

Relying on isolated quotes from a couple of studies is
nonsense.

Dutch

Thu, Oct-07-04, 19:17

"pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote
> > "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> > > "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote
> > > > "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> > > > > "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote >>
> > > >
> > > > [..]
> > > >
> > > > >> Read the damn thing.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> quote
> > > > >>
> > > > >> "This article comes from The Vegan Society"
> > > > >>
> > > > >> unquote
> > > > >
> > > > > You should have read it,... specifically what you
> > > > > SNIPPED:
> > > >
> > > > I did read it. It starts with "This article comes from
> > > > The Vegan
> > Society"
> > >
> > > And snipped again..
> >
> > So what? I am under no obligation to requrgitate the text
> > that YOU copy/paste into YOUR posts.
>
> Twist away, little snake.

As always, facts confound you.

> > > > [..]
> > > > >> Scientific observers do not use vague, passive
> > > > >> weasel phrases
like
> > "it
> > > > >> has been reported", they say where and when and
> > > > >> how.
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.eatright.org/Public/GovernmentAffairs/92-
> > > > > _17084.cfm
> > > >
> > > > That's not science, it's generalities, it's just poor
> > > > writing.
> > >
> > > Timewaster.
> >
> > To the degree that I spend time trying to reason with you,
> > I agree.
>
> You're as delusional as ever.

Your comments are become increasingly repetitive and
irrelevant.

> > > > When they say "Vegetarians have been reported to have
> > > > lower body mass indices than non-vegetarians..." who
> > > > are they talking about? Which
non-vegetarians, what
> > > > exactly did the non-vegetarians in this study eat?
> > > > Where is this
information
> > > > coming from? These questions demand answers.
> > >
> > > These 'answers' have been posted umpteen times in
> > > this NG.
> >
> > That fails to address the question. There are thousands of
> > studies on nutrition, why should we select the few that
> > reinforce your extreme bias
and
> > disregard all the rest?
>
> I challenge you to present a study abstract showing
> otherwise.

http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=4655

How many will it take to shut you up?

> > > > Healthy vegetarian diets are better than deficient
> > > > non-vegetarian diets, of course, but are poor
> > > > vegetarian diets better than healthy non-vegetarian
> > > > diets? Of course
not,
> > > > not even you believe that. Well, maybe a nut like
> > > > you..
> > >
> > > There's no such thing as a 'healthy non-vegetarian
> > > diet'!
> >
> > False. Thank you for proving my point.
>
> '.. 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.' ht-
> tp://www.news.cornell.edu/releases/Nov98/thermogenesis_pa-
> per.html

Yawn.. you have pasted that one quote 100's of times as it
represented revealed truth.

> > > > This Association strongly supports including meat in a
> > > > balanced diet
by the
> > > > way.
> > >
> > > Either they or you are confused..
> >
> > The ADA is confused and you have all the answers.. yea
> > right.
>
> IF that's what *they* say. How about you provide a cite?

http://www.eatright.org/Public/NutritionInformation/92_13209.-
cfm

>
> > -pffft-
>
> Of course, dodge. -restore- 'Vegetarians have been reported
> to have lower body mass indices than nonvegetarians,

Reported by whom? Which vegetarians? Which non-vegetarians?
The sentence is meaningless.

> as well as lower rates of death from ischemic heart disease;
> vegetarians also show lower blood cholesterol levels; lower
> blood pressure; and lower rates of hypertension, type 2
> diabetes, and prostate and colon cancer. ' http://www.eatri-
> ght.org/Public/GovernmentAffairs/92_17084.cfm

Reporters should be more careful with their
generalizations, with extremists around to pounce and
misinterpert their words..

Pearl

Thu, Oct-07-04, 19:17

"Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote in message
news:10mb4au507ffpcf@news.supernews.com...
> "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> > "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote
> > > "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> > > > "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote
> > > > > "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> > > > > > "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote >>
> > > > >
> > > > > [..]
> > > > >
> > > > > >> Read the damn thing.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> quote
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> "This article comes from The Vegan Society"
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> unquote
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You should have read it,... specifically what you
> > > > > > SNIPPED:
> > > > >
> > > > > I did read it. It starts with "This article comes
> > > > > from The Vegan Society"
> > > >
> > > > And snipped again..
> > >
> > > So what? I am under no obligation to requrgitate the
> > > text that YOU copy/paste into YOUR posts.
> >
> > Twist away, little snake.
>
> As always, facts confound you.

Wriggle wriggle..

> > > > > [..]
> > > > > >> Scientific observers do not use vague, passive
> > > > > >> weasel phrases like
> > > "it
> > > > > >> has been reported", they say where and when and
> > > > > >> how.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://www.eatright.org/Public/GovernmentAffairs/-
> > > > > > 92_17084.cfm
> > > > >
> > > > > That's not science, it's generalities, it's just
> > > > > poor writing.
> > > >
> > > > Timewaster.
> > >
> > > To the degree that I spend time trying to reason with
> > > you, I agree.
> >
> > You're as delusional as ever.
>
> Your comments are become increasingly repetitive and
> irrelevant.

Projection.

> > > > > When they say "Vegetarians have been reported to
> > > > > have lower body mass indices than
> > > > > non-vegetarians..." who are they talking about?
> > > > > Which non-vegetarians, what exactly did the
> > > > > non-vegetarians in this study eat? Where is this
> > > > > information coming from? These questions demand
> > > > > answers.
> > > >
> > > > These 'answers' have been posted umpteen times in this
> > > > NG.
> > >
> > > That fails to address the question. There are thousands
> > > of studies on nutrition, why should we select the few
> > > that reinforce your extreme bias
> and
> > > disregard all the rest?
> >
> > I challenge you to present a study abstract showing
> > otherwise.
>
> http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=4655

Totally irrelevant.

> How many will it take to shut you up?

"Vegetarians have been reported to have lower body mass
indices than non-vegetarians..." Present ONE study abstract
that shows otherwise.

> > > > > Healthy vegetarian diets are better than deficient
> > > > > non-vegetarian diets, of course, but are poor
> > > > > vegetarian diets better than healthy non-vegetarian
> > > > > diets? Of course
> not,
> > > > > not even you believe that. Well, maybe a nut like
> > > > > you..
> > > >
> > > > There's no such thing as a 'healthy non-vegetarian
> > > > diet'!
> > >
> > > False. Thank you for proving my point.
> >
> > '.. 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.' ht-
> > tp://www.news.cornell.edu/releases/Nov98/thermogenesis_pa-
> > per.html
>
> Yawn.. you have pasted that one quote 100's of times as it
> represented revealed truth.

It does..

'China Study I is now regarded as the most comprehensive study
of diet, lifestyle and disease ever completed. Data from the
study was first published in an 896-page monograph (1990) and
resulted in more than 50 scientific publications. Planned
since 1987, China Study II was designed to resurvey the same
mainland Chinese population as China Study I, in addition to a
few new sites in mainland China and a new population of 16
counties in Taiwan. '
http://www.sdearthtimes.com/et1101/et1101s18.html

> > > > > This Association strongly supports including meat in
> > > > > a balanced diet
> by the
> > > > > way.
> > > >
> > > > Either they or you are confused..
> > >
> > > The ADA is confused and you have all the answers.. yea
> > > right.
> >
> > IF that's what *they* say. How about you provide a cite?
>
> http://www.eatright.org/Public/NutritionInformation/92_1-
> 3209.cfm

'This fact sheet is sponsored by America’s Beef Producers
through their $1-per-head beef checkoff program. This program
is managed by the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association on
behalf of the Cattlemen’s Beef Board. The contents have been
reviewed by the American Dietetic Association’s Fact Sheet
Review Board. The appearance of this information does not
constitute an endorsement by ADA of the sponsor’s products or
services. This fact sheet was prepared for the general public.
Questions regarding its content and use should be directed to
a dietetics professional.'

LOL!

> > > -pffft-
> >
> > Of course, dodge. -restore- 'Vegetarians have been
> > reported to have lower body mass indices than
> > nonvegetarians,
>
> Reported by whom? Which vegetarians? Which non-vegetarians?
> The sentence is meaningless.

By scientists conducting epidemiological research, dimwit.

> > as well as lower rates of death from ischemic heart
> > disease; vegetarians also show lower blood cholesterol
> > levels; lower blood pressure; and lower rates of
> > hypertension, type 2 diabetes, and prostate and colon
> > cancer. ' http://www.eatright.org/Public/GovernmentAffair-
> > s/92_17084.cfm
>
> Reporters should be more careful with their
> generalizations, with extremists around to pounce and
> misinterpert their words..

..... Like you, eh, ditch?

Dutch

Thu, Oct-07-04, 19:17

"pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote
[..]

> > As always, facts confound you.
>
> Wriggle wriggle..

You do that well.

[..]

> > Your comments are become increasingly repetitive and
> > irrelevant.
>
> Projection.

Observation

[..]
> > > I challenge you to present a study abstract showing
> > > otherwise.
> >
> > http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifie-
> > r=4655
>
> Totally irrelevant.

It's completely relevant.

> > How many will it take to shut you up?
>
> "Vegetarians

Which vegetarians?

have been reported

By whom?

to have lower body mass indices than
> non-vegetarians..."

Which non-vegetarians? What foods comprised the diets of the
two groups?

> Present ONE study abstract that shows otherwise.

It's a generalization, one I don't dispute. It's also
irrelevant. I can still consume meat and have a lower body
mass index than "vegetarians". Sounds silly when you refer to
an entire group in such a vague fashion doesn't it?

[..]
> > > http://www.news.cornell.edu/releases/Nov98/thermogenesi-
> > > s_paper.html
> >
> > Yawn.. you have pasted that one quote 100's of times as it
> > represented revealed truth.
>
> It does..

It reinforces your dogmatic belief, so it rings true to you..

> 'China Study I is now regarded as the most comprehensive
> study of diet, lifestyle and disease ever completed. Data
> from the study was first
published
> in an 896-page monograph (1990) and resulted in more than 50
> scientific publications. Planned since 1987, China Study II
> was designed to resurvey the same mainland Chinese
> population as China Study I, in addition to a few new sites
> in mainland China and a new population of 16 counties in
> Taiwan. ' http://www.sdearthtimes.com/et1101/et1101s18.html

Another one you quote ad nauseum.
>
> > > > > > This Association strongly supports including meat
> > > > > > in a balanced
diet
> > by the
> > > > > > way.
> > > > >
> > > > > Either they or you are confused..
> > > >
> > > > The ADA is confused and you have all the answers.. yea
> > > > right.
> > >
> > > IF that's what *they* say. How about you provide a cite?
> >
> > http://www.eatright.org/Public/NutritionInformation/92_13-
> > 209.cfm
>
> 'This fact sheet is sponsored by America's Beef Producers
> through their $1-per-head beef checkoff program. This
> program is managed by the National Cattlemen's Beef
> Association on behalf of the Cattlemen's Beef Board. The
> contents have been reviewed by the American Dietetic
> Association's Fact Sheet Review Board. The appearance of
> this information does not constitute an endorsement by ADA
> of the sponsor's products or services. This fact sheet was
> prepared for the general public. Questions regarding its
> content and use should be directed to a dietetics
> professional.'
>
> LOL!

Exactly as your quote from that site was copied directly from
The Vegan Society. Is lack of objectivity OK when it favours
your bias and funny when it doesn't?

[..]
> > > 'Vegetarians have been reported to have lower body mass
> > > indices than nonvegetarians,
> >
> > Reported by whom? Which vegetarians? Which
> > non-vegetarians? The sentence
is
> > meaningless.
>
> By scientists conducting epidemiological research, dimwit.

Inserting a multi-syllabic term does not make it more specific

It's simple thermodynamics, people who consume fewer calories
and expend more will have lower body mass indices, therefore
if a given group of vegetarians has a lower average caloric
intake relative to their output they will have lower body
masses. It's very easy to see how this would be the case,
since meat is calorie *and* nutrient dense.

Fri, Oct-08-04, 06:15

"pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
news:ck4cii$sij$1@kermit.esat.net...
> "ta" <ta33@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:c5c0e6e6.0410071140.341f97e4@posting.google.com...
> > "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
news:<ck3bgl$iie$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> > > "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote in message
news:ih39d.12005$a41.11350@pd7tw2no...
> > > > "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> > > > > "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote >>
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > > > Healthy vegetarian diets are better than deficient
> > > > non-vegetarian diets, of course, but are poor
> > > > vegetarian diets better than healthy non-vegetarian
> > > > diets? Of course
not,
> > > > not even you believe that. Well, maybe a nut like
> > > > you..
> > >
> > > There's no such thing as a 'healthy non-vegetarian
> > > diet'!
> >
> > Of course there is. A diet consisting of mostly fresh
> > fruits, vegetables and grains, supplemented with moderate
> > amounts of high quality meat, is perfectly healthy. A
> > typical meat-centric, western diet is not healthy at all,
> > but to say that any and all meat eating is unhealthy
> > smacks of dogma.
>
> '.. 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.' ht-
> tp://www.news.cornell.edu/releases/Nov98/thermogenesis_pa-
> per.html
>
> How much of a disease producing 'food' is healthy? NONE!

Yeah, I figured you would post this one obscure study again
to "prove" the inappropriate and extreme conclusions you
have drawn.

Show me one or more long-term studies that compare populations
who have eaten a healthy diet consisting of primarily organic
fruits, vegetables, and grains supplemented with moderate
amounts of high quality fish and organic meats with a vegan
group, and then we'll have something.

In the meantime, she looks pretty "healthy" to me! :-)
http://milano.vinden.nl/

Dutch

Fri, Oct-08-04, 06:15

"ta" <ta33@bellsouth.net> wrote

> In the meantime, she looks pretty "healthy" to me! :-)
> http://milano.vinden.nl/

Yowsa!

Pearl

Fri, Oct-08-04, 06:15

"ta" <ta33@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:brm9d.40757$yp.34439@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
>
> "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
> news:ck4cii$sij$1@kermit.esat.net...
> > "ta" <ta33@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:c5c0e6e6.0410071140.341f97e4@posting.google.com...
> > > "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
> news:<ck3bgl$iie$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> > > > "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote in message
> news:ih39d.12005$a41.11350@pd7tw2no...
> > > > > "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
<..>
> > > > There's no such thing as a 'healthy non-vegetarian
> > > > diet'!
> > >
> > > Of course there is. A diet consisting of mostly fresh
> > > fruits, vegetables and grains, supplemented with
> > > moderate amounts of high quality meat, is perfectly
> > > healthy. A typical meat-centric, western diet is not
> > > healthy at all, but to say that any and all meat eating
> > > is unhealthy smacks of dogma.
> >
> > '.. 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/Nov98/thermogenesis-
> > _paper.html
> >
> > How much of a disease producing 'food' is healthy? NONE!
>
> Yeah, I figured you would post this one obscure study again
> to "prove" the inappropriate and extreme conclusions you
> have drawn.

Yeah, I figured you would try to ignore a definitive study to
cling to the false and illogical conclusions you have drawn.

Again you didn't answer the question.

> Show me one or more long-term studies that compare
> populations who have eaten a healthy diet consisting of
> primarily organic fruits, vegetables, and grains
> supplemented with moderate amounts of high quality fish and
> organic meats with a vegan group, and then we'll have
> something.

You already have enough, but just to satisfy you..

'Plasma lipids and diet groups

The first article published about this study compared
concentrations of total cholesterol and various lipoprotein
fractions in 4 diet groups: vegans, who never ate animal
products; vegetarians, who never ate meat or fish but did eat
dairy products, eggs, or both; fish eaters, who ate fish but
no meat; and meat eaters (4). Both total- and LDL-cholesterol
concentrations were significantly lower in vegans than in meat
eaters, whereas vegetarians and fish eaters had similar,
intermediate values. HDL-cholesterol concentrations were
highest in fish eaters but did not differ among the other diet
groups. Mean cholesterol concentrations for vegans,
vegetarians, fish eaters, and meat eaters, adjusted for age
and sex, are shown in Table 1. On the basis of these results,
it was predicted that the incidence of ischemic heart disease
might be 24% lower in lifelong vegetarians and 57% lower in
lifelong vegans than in meat eaters. .... The most striking
results from the analysis were the strong positive
associations between increasing consumption of animal fats and
ischemic heart disease mortality [death rate ratios (and 95%
CIs) for the highest third of intake compared with the lowest
third in subjects with no prior disease were 3.29 (1.50, 7.21)
for total animal fat, 2.77 (1.25, 6.13) for saturated animal
fat, and 3.53 (1.57, 7.96) for dietary cholesterol; P for
trend: <0.01, <0.01, and <0.001, respectively]. In contrast,
no protective effects were noted for dietary fiber, fish, or
alcohol consumption. Consumption of eggs and cheese were both
positively associated with ischemic heart disease mortality in
these subjects (P for trend, < 0.01 for both foods).
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/70/3/525S

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)

More?

Fri, Oct-08-04, 19:17

"pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
news:<ck5quo$ab6$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> "ta" <ta33@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:brm9d.40757$yp.34439@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
> >
> > "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
> > news:ck4cii$sij$1@kermit.esat.net...
> > > "ta" <ta33@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:c5c0e6e6.0410071140.341f97e4@posting.google.com...
> > > > "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
> news:<ck3bgl$iie$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> > > > > "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote in message
> news:ih39d.12005$a41.11350@pd7tw2no...
> > > > > > "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> <..>
> > > > > There's no such thing as a 'healthy non-vegetarian
> > > > > diet'!
> > > >
> > > > Of course there is. A diet consisting of mostly fresh
> > > > fruits, vegetables and grains, supplemented with
> > > > moderate amounts of high quality meat, is perfectly
> > > > healthy. A typical meat-centric, western diet is not
> > > > healthy at all, but to say that any and all meat
> > > > eating is unhealthy smacks of dogma.
> > >
> > > '.. 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/-
> > > Nov98/thermogenesis_paper.html
> > >
> > > How much of a disease producing 'food' is healthy? NONE!
> >
> > Yeah, I figured you would post this one obscure study
> > again to "prove" the inappropriate and extreme conclusions
> > you have drawn.
>
> Yeah, I figured you would try to ignore a definitive
> study to cling to the false and illogical conclusions you
> have drawn.
>
> Again you didn't answer the question.

You must be referring to your loaded question above that
contains implicitly false premises. Shall I ask you how many
times you beat your wife today?

The problem with your classification of meat as a
disease-producing entity is that you ignore all of the
beneficial aspects of meat, which of course are well
documented. Meat can be both a disease-producing agent, as
well as a health-producing agent, if used properly and in the
right form (even the meat products that come out of factory
farms have some benefits).

Your classification of meat as "disease producing", which is
conveniently created to suit your moral/religious agenda, is
an inaccurate one, and one that the vast majority of
individuals, health practitioners (traditional and
non-traditional alike), and other nutritional experts would
likely reject as well.

Your "all or nothing/with us or against us" approach is not a
"healthy" one. ;-)

> > Show me one or more long-term studies that compare
> > populations who have eaten a healthy diet consisting of
> > primarily organic fruits, vegetables, and grains
> > supplemented with moderate amounts of high quality fish
> > and organic meats with a vegan group, and then we'll have
> > something.
>
> You already have enough, but just to satisfy you..

No, I don't actually. Your conclusions don't follow from the
study you posted. You've taken it to the extreme, which is
what happens when conclusions come first and "evidence" later.

Notice that the only information we have about the meat-eating
group in regards to the frequency and quality of meat they
consumed is that "they consumed meat at least once a week".
Sorry, that's not enough information. What kind of meat? How
often specifically? What did the rest of their diet consist
of? Was their meat grass-fed or was it factory farmed garbage?
Did they eat blood sausage and fried chicken, or did they eat
small portions of organic beef with fresh greens and fruit?

Regardless, to claim that the higher rates of heart disease
witnessed necessarily qualify as "unhealthy" is a stretch. If
a meat eater lives five years less than a vegan, does that
mean the meat eater lived an "unhealthy" life? Of course not.

In addition, you appear to not have read my post very
carefully. The above study does not fulfill the criteria I
stated. What I said was:

"Show me one or more long-term studies that compare
populations who have eaten a healthy diet *consisting of
primarily organic fruits, vegetables, and grains supplemented
with moderate amounts of high quality fish and organic meats*
with a vegan group, and then we'll have something."

Is there anything in the study to indicate that this describes
the meat eating group?

<snip>

> http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/70/3/525S

An excellent study which I have referenced before. However,
once again, your conclusions do not flow logically from the
evidence. See above description.

> 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)

Ditto.

> More?

So do you think Miss Sharapova is unhealthy? Too young to
tell? How 'bout my 94 year old grandmother? She's still
kickin' butt! (sorry, no pictures) ;-). Cholesterol good, no
cancers, living on her own, and yet she has eaten plenty of
meat. Go figure.

Now she may live to only be 100, instead of 105 or 110, so I
guess that makes her "unhealthy" by your definition?

Dutch

Fri, Oct-08-04, 19:17

"pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> "ta" <ta33@bellsouth.net> wrote

> > > How much of a disease producing 'food' is healthy? NONE!
> >
> > Yeah, I figured you would post this one obscure study
> > again to "prove"
the
> > inappropriate and extreme conclusions you have drawn.
>
> Yeah, I figured you would try to ignore a definitive
> study to cling to the false and illogical conclusions you
> have drawn.

Definitive study? Not the one you cited. It specifically
has not reached the conclusion YOU are drawing, since it
groups those who eat fish and who eat meat occasionally as
non-meat eaters.

"Subjects were divided into meat eaters (who ate meat at least
once a week) and non-meat-eaters (all others). Most of the
non-meat-eaters were vegetarian or vegan, although 23% of the
non-meat-eaters ate meat occasionally but less than once a
week, or ate fish, or both. "

Doesn't sound very definitive to me, not if one is attempting
to conclude that meat is toxic in ANY amount. THAT is a false
and illogical conclusion.

[..]

Pearl

Sat, Oct-09-04, 19:16

"ta" <ta33@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:c5c0e6e6.0410081105.16e7f922@posting.google.com...
> "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
> news:<ck5quo$ab6$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> > "ta" <ta33@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> > news:brm9d.40757$yp.34439@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
> > >
> > > "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
> > > news:ck4cii$sij$1@kermit.esat.net...
> > > > "ta" <ta33@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> > news:c5c0e6e6.0410071140.341f97e4@posting.google.com...
> > > > > "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
> > news:<ck3bgl$iie$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> > > > > > "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote in message
> > news:ih39d.12005$a41.11350@pd7tw2no...
> > > > > > > "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> > <..>
> > > > > > There's no such thing as a 'healthy non-vegetarian
> > > > > > diet'!
> > > > >
> > > > > Of course there is. A diet consisting of mostly
> > > > > fresh fruits, vegetables and grains, supplemented
> > > > > with moderate amounts of high quality meat, is
> > > > > perfectly healthy. A typical meat-centric, western
> > > > > diet is not healthy at all, but to say that any and
> > > > > all meat eating is unhealthy smacks of dogma.
> > > >
> > > > '.. 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://ww-
> > > > w.news.cornell.edu/releases/Nov98/thermogenesis_pape-
> > > > r.html
> > > >
> > > > How much of a disease producing 'food' is healthy?
> > > > NONE!
> > >
> > > Yeah, I figured you would post this one obscure study
> > > again to "prove" the inappropriate and extreme
> > > conclusions you have drawn.
> >
> > Yeah, I figured you would try to ignore a definitive study
> > to cling to the false and illogical conclusions you have
> > drawn.
> >
> > Again you didn't answer the question.
>
> You must be referring to your loaded question above that
> contains implicitly false premises. Shall I ask you how many
> times you beat your wife today?

Obfuscation. It's a simple question. You just don't like
the answer

> The problem with your classification of meat as a
> disease-producing entity is that you ignore all of the
> beneficial aspects of meat, which of course are well
> documented.

What would those be exactly, and that I couldn't get from
healthy foods?

> Meat can be both a disease-producing agent, as well as a
> health-producing agent, if used properly and in the right
> form (even the meat products that come out of factory farms
> have some benefits).

'.. 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/Nov98/thermogenesis_paper.html

> Your classification of meat as "disease producing", which is
> conveniently created to suit your moral/religious agenda,

What an ignorant twerp!

> is an inaccurate one,

It is supported by the research, dreamer.

> and one that the vast majority of individuals, health
> practitioners (traditional and non-traditional alike), and
> other nutritional experts would likely reject as well.

Argumentum ad populum.

> Your "all or nothing/with us or against us" approach is not
> a "healthy" one. ;-)

So when did you start eating meat, ta?

> > > Show me one or more long-term studies that compare
> > > populations who have eaten a healthy diet consisting of
> > > primarily organic fruits, vegetables, and grains
> > > supplemented with moderate amounts of high quality fish
> > > and organic meats with a vegan group, and then we'll
> > > have something.
> >
> > You already have enough, but just to satisfy you..
>
> No, I don't actually.

Actually, you do.

> Your conclusions don't follow from the study you posted.

Yes, they do.

> You've taken it to the extreme, which is what happens when
> conclusions come first and "evidence" later.

My conclusions are based on the evidence.

> Notice that the only information we have about the
> meat-eating group in regards to the frequency and quality of
> meat they consumed is that "they consumed meat at least once
> a week". Sorry, that's not enough information. What kind of
> meat? How often specifically? What did the rest of their
> diet consist of? Was their meat grass-fed or was it factory
> farmed garbage? Did they eat blood sausage and fried
> chicken, or did they eat small portions of organic beef with
> fresh greens and fruit?

Whatever people normally eat. Were the veg*ns all eating
organic?

> Regardless, to claim that the higher rates of heart disease
> witnessed necessarily qualify as "unhealthy" is a stretch.
> If a meat eater lives five years less than a vegan, does
> that mean the meat eater lived an "unhealthy" life? Of
> course not.

Good grief, ta. Do yourself a favour, and read this article;
www.organichealthandbeauty.com/optimumhealth.html .

> In addition, you appear to not have read my post very
> carefully. The above study does not fulfill the criteria I
> stated. What I said was:
>
> "Show me one or more long-term studies that compare
> populations who have eaten a healthy diet *consisting of
> primarily organic fruits, vegetables, and grains
> supplemented with moderate amounts of high quality fish and
> organic meats* with a vegan group, and then we'll have
> something."

'Data pertinent to the issue of energy balance and body weight
control obtained in a comprehensive study of diet, lifestyle
and disease mortality in 65 counties (130 villages, 6500
adults) of rural China (Chen et al. 1990) were used for the
analysis. ..

.. 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. .. An ideal epidemiological
setting was available to investigate, with sensitivity, a
multitude of diet and disease associations because
1) of the wide ranging disease mortality rates, 2) of the very
stable residency patterns of the cohort subjects over their
entire lifetimes (90-94% were born in the counties where
they were surveyed),
2) of the consumption of locally produced food, and 4) of the
remarkable consistency of dietary patterns for each survey
site over time (Piazza 1986). .. http://www.news.cornell.e-
du/releases/Nov98/thermogenesis_paper.html

'Not good enough', do I hear you moan?

> Is there anything in the study to indicate that this
> describes the meat eating group?

What magical properties do you ascribe to organic meats,
that can disappear saturated fat, cholesterol, uric acid,
and the rest?

> <snip>
>
> > http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/70/3/525S
>
> An excellent study which I have referenced before. However,
> once again, your conclusions do not flow logically from the
> evidence. See above description.

False. See above question.

> > 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)
>
> Ditto.
>
> > More?
>
> So do you think Miss Sharapova

Get real.

Sat, Oct-09-04, 19:16

pearl wrote:
> "ta" <ta33@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:c5c0e6e6.0410081105.16e7f922@posting.google.com...
>> "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
>> news:<ck5quo$ab6$1@kermit.esat.net>...
>>> "ta" <ta33@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>>> news:brm9d.40757$yp.34439@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
>>>>
>>>> "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
>>>> news:ck4cii$sij$1@kermit.esat.net...
>>>>> "ta" <ta33@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>>> news:c5c0e6e6.0410071140.341f97e4@posting.google.com...
>>>>>> "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
>>> news:<ck3bgl$iie$1@kermit.esat.net>...
>>>>>>> "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote in message
>>> news:ih39d.12005$a41.11350@pd7tw2no...
>>>>>>>> "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
>>> <..>
>>>>>>> There's no such thing as a 'healthy non-vegetarian
>>>>>>> diet'!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course there is. A diet consisting of mostly fresh
>>>>>> fruits, vegetables and grains, supplemented with
>>>>>> moderate amounts of high quality meat, is perfectly
>>>>>> healthy. A typical meat-centric, western diet is not
>>>>>> healthy at all, but to say that any and all meat eating
>>>>>> is unhealthy smacks of dogma.
>>>>>
>>>>> '.. 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/-
>>>>> Nov98/thermogenesis_paper.html
>>>>>
>>>>> How much of a disease producing 'food' is healthy? NONE!
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, I figured you would post this one obscure study
>>>> again to "prove" the inappropriate and extreme
>>>> conclusions you have drawn.
>>>
>>> Yeah, I figured you would try to ignore a definitive study
>>> to cling to the false and illogical conclusions you have
>>> drawn.
>>>
>>> Again you didn't answer the question.
>>
>> You must be referring to your loaded question above that
>> contains implicitly false premises. Shall I ask you how
>> many times you beat your wife today?
>
> Obfuscation. It's a simple question. You just don't like
> the answer

Your "black and white/with us or against" mentality is not
productive. Your question is clearly a loaded one. How many
times did you beat your wife today? It's a simple question.
Perhaps you just don't like the answer.

>> The problem with your classification of meat as a
>> disease-producing entity is that you ignore all of the
>> beneficial aspects of meat, which of course are well
>> documented.
>
> What would those be exactly,

Surely you are familiar with them. They have been
well-documented on this ng, which you seem to religiously
follow, and the internet is of course an endless resource.

> and that I couldn't get from healthy foods?

Very sneaky. First, your statement implies that meat is not
healthy, which of course is the very question at hand.
Obviously your question assumes too much (how many times have
you beat your wife today?).

Second, you are tagging on a qualifier to your original claim
that any and all meat eating is unhealthy. Does meat contain
things that are healthful for humans or not? Are omega 3 efa
and vitamin b12 healthful things for humans, and does meat
contain these items? If the answer is yes, which it obviously
is, then meat sure contains some benefit, does it not? That
you refuse to acknowledge this very simple fact does not bode
well for your credibility, imo.

>> Meat can be both a disease-producing agent, as well as a
>> health-producing agent, if used properly and in the right
>> form (even the meat products that come out of factory farms
>> have some benefits).
>
> '.. 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.' ht-
> tp://www.news.cornell.edu/releases/Nov98/thermogenesis_pa-
> per.html

That's nice. :-)

>> Your classification of meat as "disease producing", which
>> is conveniently created to suit your moral/religious
>> agenda,
>
> What an ignorant twerp!

Ladies and gentleman, meet the real "pearl".

>> is an inaccurate one,
>
> It is supported by the research, dreamer.

If you believe it, it must be true?

>> and one that the vast majority of individuals, health
>> practitioners (traditional and non-traditional alike), and
>> other nutritional experts would likely reject as well.
>
> Argumentum ad populum.

The fact that your views are so extreme and isolated does not
necessarily mean that they are false, of course, but it
certainly does offer some perspective, and makes them largely
irrelevant in the overall discussion about meat eating. Which
is why, as is becoming increasingly obvious, there's not a
whole lot of good that come out of engaging extremists like
you (or your cohorts on the "other side"). I'll pass on the
dogma, thank you very much.

>> Your "all or nothing/with us or against us" approach is not
>> a "healthy" one. ;-)
>
> So when did you start eating meat, ta?

(laugh)!!! So anyone who possesses views that conflict with
your own must be "one of THEM", eh? Anyone who parts ways with
pearl's dogma, must be one those evil meat eaters, eh? You're
just itching to affix that label, place me in that box, with
all the rest of the evil meat eaters, aren't you? And wouldn't
that make you feel good and superior and just.

It's interesting to note that you would assume that though -
very revealing.

Enough said.

p.s. Granny says "Hi". :-)

<snip

Pearl

Sat, Oct-09-04, 19:16

"ta" <ta33@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:l8V9d.300977$%n4.94506@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
> pearl wrote:
> > "ta" <ta33@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> > news:c5c0e6e6.0410081105.16e7f922@posting.google.com...
> >> "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
> >> news:<ck5quo$ab6$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> >>> "ta" <ta33@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> >>> news:brm9d.40757$yp.34439@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
> >>>>
> >>>> "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
> >>>> news:ck4cii$sij$1@kermit.esat.net...
> >>>>> "ta" <ta33@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> >>> news:c5c0e6e6.0410071140.341f97e4@posting.google.com...
> >>>>>> "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message
> >>> news:<ck3bgl$iie$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> >>>>>>> "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote in message
> >>> news:ih39d.12005$a41.11350@pd7tw2no...
> >>>>>>>> "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> >>> <..>
> >>>>>>> There's no such thing as a 'healthy non-vegetarian
> >>>>>>> diet'!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Of course there is. A diet consisting of mostly fresh
> >>>>>> fruits, vegetables and grains, supplemented with
> >>>>>> moderate amounts of high quality meat, is perfectly
> >>>>>> healthy. A typical meat-centric, western diet is not
> >>>>>> healthy at all, but to say that any and all meat
> >>>>>> eating is unhealthy smacks of dogma.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> '.. 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://ww-
> >>>>> w.news.cornell.edu/releases/Nov98/thermogenesis_pape-
> >>>>> r.html
> >>>>>
> >>>>> How much of a disease producing 'food' is healthy?
> >>>>> NONE!
> >>>>
> >>>> Yeah, I figured you would post this one obscure study
> >>>> again to "prove" the inappropriate and extreme
> >>>> conclusions you have drawn.
> >>>
> >>> Yeah, I figured you would try to ignore a definitive
> >>> study to cling to the false and illogical conclusions
> >>> you have drawn.
> >>>
> >>> Again you didn't answer the question.
> >>
> >> You must be referring to your loaded question above that
> >> contains implicitly false premises. Shall I ask you how
> >> many times you beat your wife today?
> >
> > Obfuscation. It's a simple question. You just don't like
> > the answer
>
> Your "black and white/with us or against" mentality is not
> productive. Your question is clearly a loaded one. How many
> times did you beat your wife today? It's a simple question.
> Perhaps you just don't like the answer.

And again.

> >> The problem with your classification of meat as a
> >> disease-producing entity is that you ignore all of the
> >> beneficial aspects of meat, which of course are well
> >> documented.
> >
> > What would those be exactly,
>
> Surely you are familiar with them. They have been
> well-documented on this ng, which you seem to religiously
> follow, and the internet is of course an endless resource.

Your claim; surely you can support it?

> > and that I couldn't get from healthy foods?
>
> Very sneaky. First, your statement implies that meat is not
> healthy, which of course is the very question at hand.
> Obviously your question assumes too much (how many times
> have you beat your wife today?).

Ad hominem evasion.

> Second, you are tagging on a qualifier to your original
> claim that any and all meat eating is unhealthy. Does meat
> contain things that are healthful for humans or not? Are
> omega 3 efa and vitamin b12 healthful things for humans, and
> does meat contain these items? If the answer is yes, which
> it obviously is, then meat sure contains some benefit, does
> it not? That you refuse to acknowledge this very simple fact
> does not bode well for your credibility, imo.

For the zillionth time;

Enteric microflora in the ileum produce B12- as long as they
are provided with the trace mineral cobalt (see below).

Nature 1980 Feb 21;283(5749):781-2 Vitamin B12 synthesis
by human small intestinal bacteria. Albert MJ, Mathan
VI, Baker SJ.

In man, physiological amounts of vitamin B12 (cyanocobalamin)
are absorbed by the intrinsic factor mediated mechanism
exclusively in the ileum. Human faeces contain appreciable
quantities of vitamin B12 or vitamin B12-like material
presumably produced by bacteria in the colon, but this is
unavailable to the non-coprophagic individual. However, the
human small intestine also often harbours a considerable
microflora and this is even more extensive in apparently
healthy southern Indian subjects. We now show that at least
two groups of organisms in the small bowel, Pseudomonas and
Klebsiella sp., may synthesise significant amounts of the
vitamin. PMID: 7354869 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
http://tinyurl.com/80o6

From; The Bacterial Flora of Humans

(8) While E. coli is a consistent resident of the small
intestine, many other enteric bacteria may reside here as
well, including Klebsiella, Enterobacter and Citrobacter.

9. The normal flora synthesize and excrete vitamins in excess
of their own needs, which can be absorbed as nutrients by
the host. For example, enteric bacteria secrete Vitamin K
and Vitamin B12, and lactic acid bacteria produce certain
B-vitamins.
http://www.bact.wisc.edu/Bact303/Bact303normalflora

(Antibiotics Antibiotics of all classes disrupt normal bowel
flora which synthesize some B vitamins and Vitamin K;
probiotic supplementation needed.

Oral Contraceptives Deplete, especially B1, B6, B12, folate.
http://www.interactionreport.org/depletion.html )

The B12-Cobalt Connection .. B12 synthesis by indigenous
bacteria is known to occur naturally in the human small
intestine, primary site of B12 absorption. As long as gut
bacteria have cobalt and certain other nutrients, they produce
B12. In principle then, internal B12 synthesis could fulfill
our needs without any B12 provided by diet. .. The emerging
nutritional crisis of B12 deficiency calls for remedial action
in the macro- as well as micro-environment. Broad-spectrum
remineralization of topsoils using crushed rock or dried
seaweed from ocean areas known to contain sufficient cobalt
can reestablish mineral balances necessary for healthy food
supply able to fulfill our requirement, both direct and
indirect, for B12 . The cobalt connection is especially
relevant to us growing our own food, since cobalt-deficient
areas likely are well-established. Beyond promoting
remineralization to the farm community, we can adopt the
practice in our gardens.'
http://www.championtrees.org/topsoil/b12coblt.htm .

'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, which are
likely to be at lower levels to begin with in soils that have
been abused. This may be caused in part by the lack of
beneficial mycorrhizae fungi on the roots since high levels of
fertilizer tend to kill them. Standard diets tend to be low in
various minerals, resulting in a variety of problems including
osteoporosis. http://math.ucsd.edu/~ebender/Health%20&%20Nutr-
ition/Foods/organic.html

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/whyorganic/whyorganic.htm

'The researchers found no association between plasma B12 and
meat, poultry, and fish intake, even though these foods supply
the bulk of B12 in the diet. "It's not because people aren't
eating enough meat," Tucker says. "The vitamin isn't getting
absorbed." ' ..........

Are You Vitamin B12 Deficient?

Nearly two-fifths of the U.S. population may be flirting with
marginal vitamin B12 status-that is, if a careful look at
nearly 3,000 men and women in the ongoing Framingham
(Massachusetts) Offspring Study is any indication.
Researchers found that 39 percent of the volunteers have
plasma B12 levels in the "low normal" range-below 258
picomoles per liter (pmol/L).

While this is well above the currently accepted deficiency
level of 148 pmol/L, some people exhibit neurological
symptoms at the upper level of the deficiency range,
explains study leader Katherine
L. Tucker. She is a nutritional epidemiologist at the Jean
Mayer USDA Human Nutrition Research Center on Aging at
Tufts University in Boston.

"I think there's a lot of undetected vitamin B12 deficiency
out there," says Tucker. She noted that nearly 9 percent of
the study population fell below the current deficiency
level. And more than 16 percent fell below 185 pmol/L. "Many
people may be deficient at this level," she says. "There is
some question as to what the clinical cutoff for deficiency
should be."

Deficiency can cause a type of anemia marked by fewer but
larger red blood cells. It can also cause walking and
balance disturbances, a loss of vibration sensation,
confusion, and, in advanced cases, dementia. The body
requires B12 to make the protective coating surrounding the
nerves. So inadequate B12 can expose nerves to damage.

Tucker and colleagues wanted to get a sense of B12 levels
spanning the adult population because most previous studies
have focused on the elderly. That age group was thought to
be at higher risk for deficiency. The researchers also
expected to find some connection between dietary intake and
plasma levels, even though other studies found no
association. Some of the results were surprising. The
youngest group-the 26 to 49 year olds-had about the same B12
status as the oldest group-65 and up. "We thought that low
concentrations of B12 would increase with age," says Tucker.
"But we saw a high prevalence of low B12 even among the
youngest group."

The good news is that for many people, eating more
fortified cereals and dairy products can improve B12 status
almost as much as taking supplements containing the
vitamin. Supplement use dropped the percentage of
volunteers in the danger zone (plasma B12 below 185 pmol/L)
from 20 percent to 8. Eating fortified cereals five or more
times a week or being among the highest third for dairy
intake reduced, by nearly half, the percentage of
volunteers in that zone-from 23 and 24 percent,
respectively, to 12 and 13 percent.

The researchers found no association between plasma B12 and
meat, poultry, and fish intake, even though these foods
supply the bulk of B12 in the diet. "It's not because people
aren't eating enough meat," Tucker says. "The vitamin isn't
getting absorbed." The vitamin is tightly bound to proteins
in meat and dairy products and requires high acidity to cut
it loose. As we age, we lose the acid-secreting cells in the
stomach. But what causes poor absorption in younger adults?
Tucker speculates that the high use of antacids may
contribute. But why absorption from dairy products appears
to be better than from meats is a question that needs more
research. Fortified cereals are a different story. She says
the vitamin is sprayed on during processing and is "more
like what we get in supplements."

-By Judy McBride, Agricultural Research Service Information
Staff. This research is part of Human Nutrition, an ARS
National Program (#107) described on the World Wide Web.
Katherine L. Tucker is at the Jean Mayer USDA-ARS Human
Nutrition Research Center on Aging at Tufts University, 711
Washington St., Boston, MA 02111; phone (617) 556-3351, fax
(617) 556-3344. "Are You Vitamin B12 Deficient?" was published
in the August 2000 issue of Agricultural Research magazine.

As for Omega 3,- requirements |safely| satisfied, eating
certain seeds and nuts, specifically: walnuts, pumpkin seeds,
linseeds, and hemp.

> >> Meat can be both a disease-producing agent, as well as a
> >> health-producing agent, if used properly and in the right
> >> form (even the meat products that come out of factory
> >> farms have some benefits).
> >
> > '.. 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.' ht-
> > tp://www.news.cornell.edu/releases/Nov98/thermogenesis_pa-
> > per.html
>
> That's nice. :-)

That's foolish.

> >> Your classification of meat as "disease producing", which
> >> is conveniently created to suit your moral/religious
> >> agenda,
> >
> > What an ignorant twerp!
>
> Ladies and gentleman, meet the real "pearl".

Jut stating a fact, twerp.

> >> is an inaccurate one,
> >
> > It is supported by the research, dreamer.
>
> If you believe it, it must be true?

Look up the word 'research', timewaster.

> >> and one that the vast majority of individuals, health
> >> practitioners (traditional and non-traditional alike),
> >> and other nutritional experts would likely reject as
> >> well.
> >
> > Argumentum ad populum.
>
> The fact that your views are so extreme and isolated

Ipse dixit, and false. Look at the research.

> does not necessarily mean that they are false, of course,
> but it certainly does offer some perspective, and makes them
> largely irrelevant in the overall discussion about meat
> eating. Which is why, as is becoming increasingly obvious,
> there's not a whole lot of good that come out of engaging
> extremists like you (or your cohorts on the "other side").
> I'll pass on the dogma, thank you very much.

blah blah blah.

> >> Your "all or nothing/with us or against us" approach is
> >> not a "healthy" one. ;-)
> >
> > So when did you start eating meat, ta?
>
> (laugh)!!! So anyone who possesses views that conflict with
> your own must be "one of THEM", eh? Anyone who parts ways
> with pearl's dogma, must be one those evil meat eaters, eh?
> You're just itching to affix that label, place me in that
> box, with all the rest of the evil meat eaters, aren't you?
> And wouldn't that make you feel good and superior and just.

Evasion noted.

> It's interesting to note that you would assume that though -
> very revealing.

You wrote; 'Your "all or nothing/with us or against us"
approach is not a
"healthy" one. ;-)' Thus, either you follow your own 'healthy'
approach,
and eat meat, or you follow my 'unhealthy' one. So which is
it, silly ta?

> Enough said.

Indeed.

> p.s. Granny says "Hi". :-)

Hi Granny.

> <snip>

Predictably.

Pearl

Sat, Oct-09-04, 19:16

"Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote in message
news:10mdd1mrrn0g5a5@news.supernews.com...
>
> "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> > "ta" <ta33@bellsouth.net> wrote
>
>
> > > > How much of a disease producing 'food' is healthy?
> > > > NONE!
> > >
> > > Yeah, I figured you would post this one obscure study
> > > again to "prove"
> the
> > > inappropriate and extreme conclusions you have drawn.
> >
> > Yeah, I figured you would try to ignore a definitive study
> > to cling to the false and illogical conclusions you have
> > drawn.
>
> Definitive study? Not the one you cited.

The cite discussed, which you sleazily snipped, was from the
China Study.

'China Study I is now regarded as the most comprehensive study
of diet, lifestyle and disease ever completed. Data from the
study was first published in an 896-page monograph (1990) and
resulted in more than 50 scientific publications. Planned
since 1987, China Study II was designed to resurvey the same
mainland Chinese population as China Study I, in addition to a
few new sites in mainland China and a new population of 16
counties in Taiwan. '
http://www.sdearthtimes.com/et1101/et1101s18.html

Dutch

Sat, Oct-09-04, 19:16

"pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote>>
>> "pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
>> > "ta" <ta33@bellsouth.net> wrote
>>
>>
>> > > > How much of a disease producing 'food' is healthy?
>> > > > NONE!
>> > >
>> > > Yeah, I figured you would post this one obscure study
>> > > again to "prove"
>> the
>> > > inappropriate and extreme conclusions you have drawn.
>> >
>> > Yeah, I figured you would try to ignore a definitive
>> > study to cling to the false and illogical conclusions you
>> > have drawn.
>>
>> Definitive study? Not the one you cited.
>
> The cite discussed, which you sleazily snipped, was from the
> China Study.

The comments I made were directed at the Oxford Vegetarian
Study, which YOU cited and then snipped completely from your
reply. http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/70/3/525S .

Since I have revealed that The Oxford Study included in the
classification vegetarian, people who ate meat and fish
occasionally, are you now going to ignore that study
altogether, or will you continue to quote selectively from it
hoping nobody will catch on?

> 'China Study I is now regarded as the most comprehensive
> study of diet, lifestyle and disease ever completed. Data
> from the study was first published in an 896-page monograph
> (1990) and resulted in more than 50 scientific publications.

Did subjects classified as vegetarians in The China Study eat
meat less than once a week, or not at all, did they eat eat
fish at all? Be careful. "Plant-based diets" do not
necessarily exclude animal matter altogether.

> Planned since 1987, China Study II was designed to
> resurvey the same mainland Chinese population as China
> Study I, in addition to a few new sites in mainland China
> and a new population of 16 counties in Taiwan. '
> http://www.sdearthtimes.com/et1101/et1101s18.html

That page concludes that Western diets are generally too
meat-centric. I agree, so do most authorities on nutrition,
just watch the nutrition segment any night on your local
evening news.

Besides, even if it were true that (near)zero meat was more
conducive to good health than a moderate amount, and that is
highly debatable, so what? (Near)zero sugar, alcohol, sodium,
and saturated fats, is probably more healthy than a moderate
amount, that doesn't mean people should or will discount the
enjoyment factor when choosing to include a moderate amount of
those substances in their lifestyle. Don't eat that pie,
because on paper you will be more healthy if you don't.
Enjoyment is a huge factor in human health.

Magnulus

Sun, Oct-10-04, 19:16

"Dr. Jai Maharaj" <usenet@mantra.com> wrote in message
news:MMc1t05TDKX9@rl497B6wweAbnv...
>
> o Begin with the greens. Salad greens are a good source of
> many vitamins and minerals. Darker green leafy vegetables,
> such as spinach, romaine lettuce, watercress and arugula,
> generally contain more nutrients than paler ones.

Of course, Romaine lettuce and arugula costs more than
iceberg. Salad might be a good way to lose weight, but
it's definitely not cheap. Salad is also time consuming
to prepare.

> o Pack on the protein. If your salad is the main course,
> it's important to include protein-rich ingredients. Try
> garbanzo beans, kidney beans or tofu.

Tofu? Yuck, not on a salad, no thanks. I like tofu
occasionally but I like it fried and soft in the middle ,not
spongey like too many places sell (Mori-nu silken is the
best, too).

Almond slices taste alot better on a salad.

Tintinet

Sun, Oct-10-04, 19:16

"magnulus" <magnulus@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:<Aebad.133679$as2.33621@bignews3.bellsouth.net>...
> "Dr. Jai Maharaj" <usenet@mantra.com> wrote in message
> news:MMc1t05TDKX9@rl497B6wweAbnv...
> >
> > o Begin with the greens. Salad greens are a good source
> > of many vitamins and minerals. Darker green leafy
> > vegetables, such as spinach, romaine lettuce, watercress
> > and arugula, generally contain more nutrients than paler
> > ones.
>
> Of course, Romaine lettuce and arugula costs more than
> iceberg. Salad might be a good way to lose weight, but
> it's definitely not cheap. Salad is also time consuming
> to prepare.

Quite expensive, but quick, is buying mixed spring greens or
similar prepared high quality salad green mix from which to
prepare a salad.

>
> > o Pack on the protein. If your salad is the main course,
> > it's important to include protein-rich ingredients. Try
> > garbanzo beans, kidney beans or tofu.
>
> Tofu? Yuck, not on a salad, no thanks. I like tofu
> occasionally but I like it fried and soft in the middle
> ,not spongey like too many places sell (Mori-nu silken is
> the best, too).
>
> Almond slices taste alot better on a salad.