Bear also commented that the buildup was old, based on what his cardiologists told him. It's in the thread somewhere.

Tom, what about micronutrients? I think this is what is destroyed with cooking. I don't think the denaturing of proteins is really so much the issue.

Bear's cardiologist explained to him all about that input/output/black box magic, and Bear felt this HAD to be the best cardiologist on the planet... and he trusted him to do (and know) the right thing.

That was my understanding too. Once the plaque is there the best you can do is stop further buildup. That's why I think this notion that if you can't provide a link it must not be true is garbage. Just because you can click a link doesn't make it true and we've all seen how studies can be tweaked and flawed.

You're really hung up on the black box thing, aren't you?

Well at least WE are in agreement then!

Lose after 185??? Well 190's has always been a good weight for me. But a few years have past since I've lifted and now I have less muscle. I have a little bit of fat on my belly that I thought I'd try and lose. Since 190's used to be a good weight, I figure now with less muscle I'd try 180 and see how I like it.

Well... if one claims they "work on the black box standard"... I would think they would want to have specialists that did the same. Personally, if I had cancer or heart problems, etc. and my doctors started telling me they "work on the black box standard"... I'd be VERY NERVOUS, to say the least!

Originally Posted by paulm
Without getting too technical can't we just say that there is no way that it can be the "real" or "best" diet as it is unfollowable? Even Bear says that virtually all who try fail....









So did I.

I'm going to switch sides for a minute.

I find myself in Bear's position quite often, and I'm beginning to empathize, a little. I've been an advisor to large corporations for 25 years, principally on the subject of analytics - predictive modeling, analytical business processes and the proliferation of analytical capabilities amongst workers. Last year, a professor published an article in The Harvard Business Review entitled, "Competing On Analytics," based on three "studies" he conducted of organizations. He has no experience in the domain. His conclusions are completely wrong. I've since countered him in various publications, but his response to me is, "Where are you numbers?"

My response is that a few lousy surveys from an enterprising academic are hardly a substitute for 25 years of real on-the-ground experience.

Is this starting to sound familiar?

I can relate to how Bear feels. However, the difference is, I am not advising a large group of strangers, over the internet, on serious matters of health. I work on a fairly intimate basis with clients, learning their strategies, processes and culture before making suggestions. They also perform their due diligence before they hire me, checking references, etc. Nevertheless, I did think it was absurd that this guy would suggest that my experience was less valuable than his "studies."

Here's another way to look at it. Maybe people who ask for studies just don't want to believe you in the first place. My wife wrote a book with over 2000 studies cited, and people who don't want to believe her conclusions still ask for "proof." I'm not even including the doctors (most of them) who don't even read the book. Again, sound familiar? Read the thread?

So Bear, I feel your pain, whether I agree with you or not.

And, just to add more confusion, in some states (ahem...the BLUEGRASS state, Kentucky), it's a shade of blue.

BTW...not that this thread needs any more in depth discussion of the nature and contents of vomit, but it seems most (if not all) have made the assumption that when one experiences reverse peristalsis the only thing that process produces is the contents of one's stomach. As anyone who has ever had the dry heaves that produce bile can attest to, the contents of the upper small intestine can also be vomited so claiming that your veggies haven't left your stomach because you threw them up 4 hours after eating them isn't proof that those veggies were still in your stomach.

Dean, what micronutrients are you referring to? Vitamins or minerals? Minerals shouldn't leave unless you boil the meat or cook in a manner that lets the juices escape (grilling well done). Some vitamins may be lost by heating, I don't know which ones are heat labile. I like a medium rare steak myself. But I smoke a heck of a beef brisket.

Hmm, plaque is not reversed, bummer.

Ascorbic acid is destroyed by heat, which is why these people have to eat meat raw or close to it to protect against scurvy. That was the big one I discovered, but my assumption is AA isn't the only thing being destroyed by heat.

Why rely on conjecture when you can try the diet on yourself at any time? This is not a philosophical matter. It does not take a life time to find out if it is healthy. If it feels healthy and makes you look healthy it is healthy. Such a coin does not have two sides.

How are you going to replace vitamins lost during heating? Vitamin pills?

As for digestion I suspect that the water in raw meat facilitates the hydrolysis. In cooked meat the water is more or less missing. The enzyme side of things in raw meat is a different matter and I am afraid I do not know of any studies on this matter. I can just say that cooked meat feels like a cannon ball in the stomach compared to raw meat.

There was some interesting recent research using HDL cholesterol directly injected into the blood to reverse atherosclerosis. It's still very experimental.

Scurvy is not due to lack of vitamin c. Eating food rich in vitamin c does not prevent or heal scurvy. Only meat can and will do that.

Scurvy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Scurvy ICD-10 E54
ICD-9 267
Scurvy is a disease that results from insufficient intake of vitamin C and leads to the formation of livid spots on the skin, spongy gums, and bleeding from almost all mucous membranes. The spots are most abundant on the thighs and legs, and a person with the ailment looks pale, feels depressed, and is partially immobilized. Scurvy was at one time common among sailors whose ships were out to sea longer than perishable fruits and vegetables could be stored and by soldiers who were similarly separated from these foods for extended periods. In infants, scurvy is sometimes referred to as Barlow's Disease, named after Sir Thomas Barlow (1845-1945), a British physician who first described it. Barlow's disease is different from Barlow's syndrome.

Scurvy is also known as Moeller's disease and Cheadle's disease

Raw blood and brain, too. Would insects do it, do you think, as long as they are consumed raw?

Treatments for scurvy

The point is that it is impossible to have insufficient levels of only one vitamin unless you are a pharmaceutical junkie. If you have scurvy, you lack a heck of a lot more than vitamin c.

If you read the treatments, the cure is lemon juice, not raw meat, or meat at all.

Raw meat will cure it, and prevent it, however. It has traces of ascorbic, and apparently that's all that's needed.

Scurvy aside, for a moment, I howled with laughter over the Lord of the Rings dialogue a few pages back, Kwik. Comic genius!

Fresh meat is superior when it comes to curing any deficiencies and you have many deficiencies when you have scurvy. Lemon juice is a joke but it is of course better than eating stuff entirely devoid of nutrients.

wow this place is insane

and this thread should come with a health warning

People, the raw meat-scurvy issue was covered a long time ago. Despite what the contrarians and naysayers claim, raw meat and it's properties will do the same thing as ascorbic acid. No warning needed.

Why bother with the skull emoticon when your accompanying picture does the same job? You look like you could use some fresh meat.

bla bla bla. You sound like you need a better education.