One aspect of diabetes that you constaly choose to ignore: we still have more insulin for the same amount of blood glucose than a healthy person does, at least, 4 times more and is some cases - 10 times. I don't know if you ever tested your fasting insulin, it may surprise your that it is still on a high side, even with decent BGs control. This excessive insulin does it job regardless of what appeared as "normal" BGs, as I say, prostetic leg is not the same as real one. Low carb diet is a abnd-aid solution, and ultimately, the desease will do it's job. Don't be fooled by Dr.Bernwtein personal experience, he is not T2, and does not have excessive insulin.
The good readings are achieved mostly due to eating barely any carbs, but the insulin is still there. Check http://www.diabetesincontrol.com/mo...rticle&sid=4449 plenty od studies showing that even tight control does not avoid diabetes complications ( you may want to search archives) and BTW, treating with insulin injections even on low carb diet will lead to a poor outcome (previous articles).

Diabetes progresses regardless of the diet, even if you see decent number on your meter, your pancrease still puts out too much insulin, and this insulin is a bad news, especially for those who got this desease earlier, in their 30s, and did not have good control from the start.

it can be some truth to it, i am not sure now that running like a hamster is really that heart healthy, after all, many athlets and marathon runner do die from heart attack, even at younger age.There is a Russian saying: the slower you go, the further you will get....makes sence to me now.

I am not going spent more time digging information for you, if you want to find some studies, you are welcome to google it. Anyway you put it, I have posted enough info, but reagrdless, you will dissagree anyway, so why bother? I am staying on my position, that cooked food and especially fried in fat, requires more enzymes than raw, lighly steamed or poached, simply because the process adds up to fat content


I am not into colon cleansing, my colon is clean enough. But I can attest that eating more raw food makes difference in skin appearance, and aid weight loss too. Does not matter why and how, but it does work, at least, for me.
May be I never had acne in my life, thanks to my eating habits, and have very few wrinkles at my age. But I also never eat deep fried, greesy food, and refined sugars.

Quote:

http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/gastro.html The very fact that nobody can seem to name these mysterious toxins produced is very telling. More telling still is when you Google 'fecal matter' and 'toxins' about all you get are vegetarian websites or colon cleansing websites.

well, quackwatch is not any better than any of these "vegeterian" websites, it is not a pubmed either.

Quote:

I could locate absolutely no scientific or physiological websites describing any sort of toxin accumulation in a normal, functioning, healthy colon.

it depends what you define by healthy functioning colon, I have been reading all along that inability to digest raw vegetables is a sing of disfunctional colon and disbacteriosis, same as when lots of gas is produced as a result of eating raw salad.

Quote:

If this really happened, surely it would be common enough with today's bad eating habits for some researcher to have measured it in a quantifiable manner?

Isn't it a sign when number of American plaqued by indigestion is actually comparable and even greater than ppl with diabetes:

Quote:

Common Indigestion: Millions of Americans Suffer from It University of Iowa Health Science Relations James Maher, MD Professor of Surgery First Published: 2003 Last Revised: December 2003 Peer Review Status: Internally Peer Reviewed Heartburn or acid indigestion is one of the most common ailments in the United States. According to the National Institutes of Health, more than 60 million American adults suffer from heartburn at least once a month, while 25 million adults experience heartburn every day.

it is also a good sign when OTC remedies for constipation, heartburn, diarrhea, indigestion are the one make the most sales.
I have to agree to disagree, no point to argue just for the heck of it.

I am tired of this, you go ahead and enojoy fried chicken and chocolate, and I will eat my sashimi with raw salad and raw fruit for dessert, and time will show who will benefit in a long run. You are not pro any diet ( this BFFM is not technically a low carb diet, mind you), your position is to show that other pount of view is wrong. I hope you are on a right path, but you did not get me convinced that fried chicken is better than raw or steamed fish, raw steak, and raw veggies and fruits.

Huh? I never set out to convince you of anything. You made claims about enzymes and you seem to want to believe them without any proof - fine, go ahead. I was just interested in the data, but you don't have any to show. Alrighty then.

I'm not interested in getting all personal about this, so back off from making random assumptions and attacking my diet (again), please.

Has anyone else forgotten what the point of this thread was??? Just me? What the hell are we arguing about? Who set out to convince anyone that eating fried chicken was better than anything? This whole thread has been going around in circles.

Perhaps there's a language barrier going on here?

Right, this is what started everyone off. K...

Dina, google William Beaumont. Read about his study on digestion. He found cooked beef digested completely in 2 hours - fastest of all the foods he tested. To be fair, I have no idea if he tested raw meats or whatever, my point is only to show that cooked meat doesn't necessarily take a long time to digest.

Also, wouldn't you agree that it's what you're used to? I'd imagine that giving a salad to a traditional Inuit might cause some digestive upset; giving steak tartare to a vegetarian Hindu might cause same. Personally I enjoy raw foods (meat, eggs etc), but I don't notice a difference between panfried salmon and raw salmon, in terms of how my digestion feels/performs other than the cooked makes me feel full longer than the raw. Cooked veg also keeps me going longer than raw, likely because it's easier to get the nutes out of them when they're cooked.

Anyway...all of this is based on my experience. You're bashing people over the head a little, or so it reads anyway - you eat a raw diet, and those that don't are somehow flawed. I am sure that this was not your intention, but please understand that when you're making claims (and not prefacing them with "this is my experience" but claiming them as if they should be the same for everyone) it peeves people off.

But it's the war zone, so peeve away if that's what you wanna do!

see, I am puzzled that you believe in something that feeling hunger shortly after eating is because your body did not get all nutrients from previous meal, while I think it is a matter of how fast that meal was digested. But i am not asking yuu to provide scientifical studies demonstrating that this is true. I take it as your personal experience and believe. Same way, I believe in raw food theory and do feel that raw food is easy to digest (based on my own experience).

Nope, I did not, everyone can eat whatever works for them, I prefer as much uncooked food in my diet as possible, and not all protein either.
Actually, I did stated that it is my experience, and then was asked to provide some supplementing information.
I just stated that I agreee with the OP, and the hell broke loose. I am not going to google anything, cuz no matter that I find, some would still object. We all have our believes and disbelieves. Every study posted can and will be interpreted depending of what is suitable for some, and works for them. I don't think all vegeterians are ill either but then I was accused of being "closet" vegeterian, LOL
I believe is raw food theory,and I don't force anyone else to eat raw. I actually, never request to post studies showing otherwise, it is personal choice what to eat.
I also beleive, and can repeat myself, that low carb diet is completely adaptable to raw food and paleo, and is healther to me than cooked bacon, fried eggs, pork rinds, ultrapasturized cream, etc. I still believe that eating food in its natural state helpfull to feel and look younger, versus eating mostly cooked food.
I stated my opinion, those who don't like it, can just ignore the poster.

I never set to convince you in anything or make you believe that raw food is better, this is my personal choice. As for enzymes, there are tons of data on the web and bunch of books demonstrating that raw food contains enzymes. Lots of folks take digestive enzyme supplements at certain age, simply because they have problems digesting food as they get older. Some ethnic groups add pineapple and papaya to every protein containing meal, because it aids igestion. Read about Thai women who eat green papaya salad EVERY DAY, as green papaya (in their "weak" opnion) is chockfull of enzymes that givee them great skin and youthfull appearance.
Same way as Polish folks eat sauerkraut with fatty pork dishes, so it gets digested better. Same as Koreans eat many different raw and fermented salads with their meat: to aid digestion. Same as Japanese eat raw and barely cooked fish to get most of nutrients, and raw and steamed but they make beatiful broth from heads and bones to get some calcium.
Anyways, it is pointless to continue. Each to his own.

Whoa, waywardsis, the William Beaumont stuff is interesting (the musket hole in the patient's stomach)! Thanks for that.

I'm not finding much about enzymes in meats. A lot of people age beef roasts before cooking them, me included, and there is a velvety texture to the beef. There is a lot of water loss that concentrates the flavor, but the texture seems to change. Enzyme action does happen in beef after it's killed, and that could be why this occurs. However, I don't know whether this makes beef more digestible. The same things are in the beef, except for less water.

Turns out the viscera of fish really have buckets of enzymes, including protein-splitting ones. Raw fish guts are a gold mine of enzymes. I can't find much on what is in their flesh. Most fish gets frozen at some point, especially if it is to be eaten raw (to kill parasites), but that only slows enzymes, it doesn't denature them.

Doing searches on enzymes in foods mostly points out that they are oxidative. So even if they did make it through, I'm not sure we really want that. But if you do, for whatever reason, eat enough raw fish guts and they will deliver quite a load! Some will be sure to make it past the stomach, and there you are.

I buy grass fed dry aged meat (at least 3 weeks), we pay for 100 pounds raw weight, but get 4 bags of final product due to mositure loss (weight loss). The dry aging does 2 things: greater flavor concetration (less mositure) and second- enzymes in meat partially "digest" meat by breaking down the protein connective tissue.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dry_aged_beef
If we assume that all mammals store enzymes and vitamins in muscle and organs tissues, then it is save to assume that enzymes in raw beef are present and the longer meat is "aged" the easier it will be on our digestion. hence, so we can eat it raw. If the meat is also frozen ( freezing does almost same thing as enzymes do), it is competely digestible and contains all the nutrients.I also think blast freezing kills parasites, so the sashimi grade tuna got to be frozen for this puspose.
if you let meat to age even further and dry out completely, it makes very yummy jerky. In my home country, aging and drying meat was a common practice done by local, and this meat was eaten raw or cooked.

Exactly, this is why Japanese eat their fish raw and belly part ( the one mongrell will usually cut off for customers) is used and prized not for enzymatic acitivity but also for higher fat content. BTW, Koreans have similar dish called "he" when they mix raw fish with spices, raw vegetables, and soy sauce, shake it for 20 minutes and it is ready to eat.


I am sure every biological process is oxidative: breathing, eating, exercising, everything causes oxidation and free radicals.
There is a certain degress of oxidation by enzymes ( not enzymes thelselves) but you probably refer to Maillard reaction again, when raw produce turnes brown and start spoiling during storage at high temperature, so not sure if it is enzymes or altered proteins.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enzyme

Oh, I do, I eat sashimi 2-3 times a week, and eat herring and macarel (not cmoked but just salt cured), and almost very rare and even raw meat, I* make carpacchio from my grass fed beef (it comes frozen).
But I also make meat and fish broths from bones, so I do eat cooked food, just not fried and not cooked at high heat.

Fish guts aren't generally on the menu at sushi bars, just the muscle meat and fat. Unfortunate (or not :P) 'cos I eat sushi at least once a week. Not sure how the viscera would be prepared though - I'd imagine that they would have a lot of bitter/acidic flavors in them from the gall bladder, stomach acid and so on. Maybe that's what traditionally made fermented fish sauce is made of.

I don't know, Wyvrn. I know that Worchestershire Sauce is made with whole anchovies that dissolve, and I think it's based on Asian fish sauces. Probably at least some small fish like anchovies and sardines go in whole, so maybe the fish gastric enzymes help with the fermenting.
Oh yeah, love sushi/sashimi. Ever been to Osaka, out on Martin Way? There's an old rumor that a Japanese family from north of Seattle flies a small plane down here to eat there.

Makes sense. Come to think of it, my favorite emergency snack, tinned sardines, includes the guts. They do have a slightly bitter flavor, but it's not objectionable.That used to be our favorite place, until a couple of years ago when the sushi chef left (he is now at the new Koibito in the Fred Meyer plaza off Pacific). I wouldn't be surprised if that rumor is true though, he is really talented.

Wyvrn

Ooh! Good tip. I've been meaning to try Koibito, it's handy by my house.

Dina, I'm not sure where you got those figures from, but this study seems to indicate that's not the case at all. Improved blood glucose control (euglycemia) resulted in decreased insulin resistance and, I would posit, the longer one maintains normal blood glucose readings, the closer to normal insulin sensitivity becomes.





See previous link. Funny how mine, by all tests that my doc can prescribe, seems to have reversed course over the past 7 years.

This link addresses many (if not most) of the inaccuracies in the original article at the beginning of this thread and gives references to their sources. Quackwatch, by the way, is a good deal better than most of these 'raw food' sites because they give links to credible sources of information, not repetition of long-disproven myths and bad science.

This link probably comes closest to my position on the whole matter. Some foods are best eaten raw and some are best eaten cooked, not because either 'stresses' the digestive system but because the nutrients are more available to us sometimes when the food is cooked and sometimes when the food is raw.



Pancreatic enzymes are not 'deactivated' by stomach acid because it is neutralized by another pancreatic secrection..bicarbonate and the release of various secretions and enzymes is carefully choregraphed by the body so that the neutralization occurs before any other digestive enzymes sensitive to acidic conditions are present in any quantity. Chyme (partially digested stomach contents) goes from a pH of about 2 in the stomach to a pH of between 7 and 8 shortly after entering the small intestine which is where the majority of digestion (breakdown and assimilation of nutrients) occurs.

That wasn't what I meant - sorry if I was unclear. Although that does happen, come to think of it. People with celiac/gluten intolerance (me) often feel hungry after they've eaten a meal containing gluten grains because they didn't absorb the nutrients from the meal. But anyway, I just meant I don't notice much of a difference other than how long the food will keep me going, so I tend to prefer cooked because it holds me longer. Raw holds me a long while too.



I agree, raw can be low carb, and paleo is low carb by default. I'm with ya honey! I just think you came across a bit...forcefully. It's hard online to distinguish mood and intention, whaddya gonna do?

Where are you from, if you don't mind? Did you mention Russia earlier, or am I crazy? I ask bc I'm brewing my first kombucha and I'm all excited...