OT Nutrition and Cancer

[rumble_lion]

Then again, there was an article published in the Annals of Internal Medicine just a couple weeks ago saying that the danger of eating meat has been exaggerated that's not causing an uprorar, and I don't link to a particular article on it because people can google it themselves and see various articles on it taking one slant or another, rather than having the one slant they see be the one I linked to.

Yeah, it's kinda like 50 years ago when they first started to say that smoking was not healthy. The tobacco companies fought back. Nobody likes to be told they have make changes to their lifestyle. All the meat/tobacco companies need to do is create a little bit of doubt. That's all people need to convince themselves they don't need to make any changes.

The WHO is citing a direct link between cancer and eating processed meat. They aren't saying it's probable they are saying it is factual.

Here is a article that brings up some questions about the meat is good study.

https://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20190930/controversial-studies-say-its-ok-to-eat-red-meat

The funny part is where they counted a study in their analysis that looked concluded that people won't like giving up eating meat, therefore they should keep eating it. Honestly you can't make this stuff up if you tried.

One of the reviews looked at people’s attitudes about eating meat. Predictably, it found that omnivores are reluctant to give it up, even if they know their health is at risk. These results were factored into the guidelines, essentially saying that since people don’t want to give up meat, they don’t need to.

A statement about the studies from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health addressed the problem: “Although taste preference is important for personalized dietary advice, it is questionable whether it should be considered as a major factor in developing dietary guidelines.” Many people don’t want to quit smoking, stop drinking, or exercise more, Sievenpiper pointed out, but that doesn’t change the recommendations.​

 

[rumble_lion]

Some say the 'meat studies' were flawed because people that eat a lot of meat are people that don't really watch their diet much. So they eat bad stuff that may have tipped the scales, like junk food. Also, less likely to exercise and may have had more bad habits like smoking or alcohol. Eating Mickey D burgers six times a week usually means also eating large buns with lots of goo, a side of fries, and lots of terrible soda pop.

Vegans are more likely to exercise, have few bad habits, overall take much better care of themselves.

Thats a huge problem with nutritional studies in humans. Too many variables.

Some say the 'meat studies' were flawed because people that eat a lot of meat are people that don't really watch their diet much. So they eat bad stuff that may have tipped the scales, like junk food.

How many people do you know that are choking down chicken wings and cheese burgers but are otherwise eating healthy?

Also, less likely to exercise and may have had more bad habits like smoking or alcohol. Eating Mickey D burgers six times a week usually means also eating large buns with lots of goo, a side of fries, and lots of terrible soda pop.

It's called the standard american diet......

Vegans are more likely to exercise, have few bad habits, overall take much better care of themselves.

If you feel good you are more likely be active. When you load up on cholesterol, trans fats, saturated fats and sugar you will put on weight and have other health issues and exercising is more difficult. It's a downward spiral.

Thats a huge problem with nutritional studies in humans. Too many variables.

Check out the Adventis Health Study. Those people as general rule do not smoke or drink alcohol for religious reasons.

 

[Op2]

Yeah, it's kinda like 50 years ago when they first started to say that smoking was not healthy. The tobacco companies fought back. Nobody likes to be told they have make changes to their lifestyle. All the meat/tobacco companies need to do is create a little bit of doubt. That's all people need to convince themselves they don't need to make any changes.

The WHO is citing a direct link between cancer and eating processed meat. They aren't saying it's probable they are saying it is factual.

Here is a article that brings up some questions about the meat is good study.

https://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20190930/controversial-studies-say-its-ok-to-eat-red-meat

The funny part is where they counted a study in their analysis that looked concluded that people won't like giving up eating meat, therefore they should keep eating it. Honestly you can't make this stuff up if you tried.

One of the reviews looked at people’s attitudes about eating meat. Predictably, it found that omnivores are reluctant to give it up, even if they know their health is at risk. These results were factored into the guidelines, essentially saying that since people don’t want to give up meat, they don’t need to.

A statement about the studies from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health addressed the problem: “Although taste preference is important for personalized dietary advice, it is questionable whether it should be considered as a major factor in developing dietary guidelines.” Many people don’t want to quit smoking, stop drinking, or exercise more, Sievenpiper pointed out, but that doesn’t change the recommendations.​

It was the Annals of Internal Medicine, not the meat companies. People can (and should) critique it just like any journal article, but it's not the result of the meat industry PR machine. The stuff about fake meat being worse than real meat is stuff from the meat industry PR machine.

 

[The Spin Meister]

How many people do you know that are choking down chicken wings and cheese burgers but are otherwise eating healthy?

That was the point of my post. That the 'meat eaters' in most of these studies are people that little attention to nutrition. Do a study of people that eat meat but very little carbs and see what happens. You might be surprised.

And people that eat low carb diets usually have more energy and thus are more active than junk food junkies.

Ask around the PSU football team and I bet you will find a substantial number of players that eat meat but few carbs. Its a growing trend among athletes.

 

[rumble_lion]

That was the point of my post. That the 'meat eaters' in most of these studies are people that little attention to nutrition. Do a study of people that eat meat but very little carbs and see what happens. You might be surprised.

And people that eat low carb diets usually have more energy and thus are more active than junk food junkies.

Ask around the PSU football team and I bet you will find a substantial number of players that eat meat but few carbs. Its a growing trend among athletes.

That was the point of my post. That the 'meat eaters' in most of these studies are people that little attention to nutrition. Do a study of people that eat meat but very little carbs and see what happens. You might be surprised.

Less worse is not that same same as good.

And people that eat low carb diets usually have more energy and thus are more active than junk food junkies.

So eating a slightly less bad diet is better for you? Wow! Amazing!

Ask around the PSU football team and I bet you will find a substantial number of players that eat meat but few carbs. Its a growing trend among athletes

Jeezus I hope not.

 

[nittanyfan333]

It’s funny how people, whatever side they are on, are so sure of their side of the argument that they’re blinded to any benefits the other side might have. I used to think it was just politics then I started reading more “blogs” from people on the carnivore diet, or from vegetarians or from whatever diet they prefer. It’s kinda sad that people aren’t more open to at least listening to the other side and hearing them out before they poo-poo their opinion.

If there’s one thing I learned about diets while I was reading about keto, it was that there’s no “silver bullet” diet. Every body reacts differently to every diet. It’s all about being informed about all the options and figuring out and deciding which diet works for you. I’ll never poo-poo anyone’s diet if it works. At least you’re trying to be more healthy.

I guess that’s my biggest takeaway: I prefer a rotation of keto and the zone based on what I’m trying to do (keto to cut, zone while I’m trying to build muscle). Do some research and find what works best for you. Whether that’s keto, or vegetarian or pescatarian or carnivore or whatever. If it works and you get what you want out of it, kudos sir.

 

[rumble_lion]

It’s funny how people, whatever side they are on, are so sure of their side of the argument that they’re blinded to any benefits the other side might have. I used to think it was just politics then I started reading more “blogs” from people on the carnivore diet, or from vegetarians or from whatever diet they prefer. It’s kinda sad that people aren’t more open to at least listening to the other side and hearing them out before they poo-poo their opinion.

If there’s one thing I learned about diets while I was reading about keto, it was that there’s no “silver bullet” diet. Every body reacts differently to every diet. It’s all about being informed about all the options and figuring out and deciding which diet works for you. I’ll never poo-poo anyone’s diet if it works. At least you’re trying to be more healthy.

If there’s one thing I learned about diets while I was reading about keto, it was that there’s no “silver bullet” diet. Every body reacts differently to every diet. It’s all about being informed about all the options and figuring out and deciding which diet works for you.

You don't believe there is an optimal diet for us to eat?

 

[Op2]

If there’s one thing I learned about diets while I was reading about keto, it was that there’s no “silver bullet” diet. Every body reacts differently to every diet. It’s all about being informed about all the options and figuring out and deciding which diet works for you.

You don't believe there is an optimal diet for us to eat?

I doubt there is one diet that is optimal for every person. Some people are more sensitive, or whatever, to X than are others. Allergies are one obvious example but I don't mean just that.

Some people have to stay away from the salt because they get hypertension easily. Other people can eat salt with no problem. There is individual variability.

 

[OLG1986]

For your discernment I recommend this site (states policy on financial interests): https://nutritionfacts.org/faq/

Plenty of info/links relevant to cancer: https://nutritionfacts.org/2019/10/03/how-not-to-die-from-cancer/

Hope this helps!

 

[The Spin Meister]

Less worse is not that same same as good.

It is opinion that a vegan diet is optimal. But a lot of research shows it may not be optimal. Vegan is better than SAD but a lot of nutritional experts will tell you it is not optimal.

As nittanyfan333 stated, find what works for you.

 

[TheGLOV]

I have had stage 1 colon cancer (cancer confined to polyp in colon and not spread -- good news) I am trying to increase my odds of avoiding a recurrence. I have easily been able to stop eating beef (switched to chicken), but it is difficult for me to cut down on eggs, which have been implicated to some extent in prostrate cancer and maybe one study dealing with colon cancer. I also exercise 7 days a week, which is supposed to be protective.

I recently came across the work of Dr. John Ioannidis, probably the most respected researcher on the topic of the problems caused by non-reproducible research and he strongly questions most nutritional research and his conclusions have been:

"In a new op-ed in JAMA, Dr. Ioannidis bluntly states that nutrition epidemiology is in need of "radical reform."

********

"Selective reporting means that any study which shows a link between bacon and early death is likelier to be published than one that doesn't show a link. Combined, Dr. Ioannidis believes that residual confounding and selective reporting have created a systemic bias in nutrition research.

Even worse, Dr. Ioannidis blames food and nutrition activists for distorting research.""https://www.acsh.org/news/2018/08/24/john-ioannidis-aims-his-bazooka-nutrition-science-13357 For more background see https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/10/10/modern-scientific-controversies-part-7-the-meat-war/

Had a meeting with my surgeon Tuesday and asked him for his gut reaction to various foods that have been implicated in colon cancer, and he stated that he would stay away from processed foods because they have so many chemicals.

I am not trying to be political here. Simply trying to do everything I can to better my own odds.

Hey Buck, I just want to say "I luv you man!" -No BS here! Keep on going. You ARE a fighter!!

Win!

WIn!!

WIN!!!

"F-u-c-k Cancer"

 

[nittanyfan333]

It’s funny how people, whatever side they are on, are so sure of their side of the argument that they’re blinded to any benefits the other side might have. I used to think it was just politics then I started reading more “blogs” from people on the carnivore diet, or from vegetarians or from whatever diet they prefer. It’s kinda sad that people aren’t more open to at least listening to the other side and hearing them out before they poo-poo their opinion.

If there’s one thing I learned about diets while I was reading about keto, it was that there’s no “silver bullet” diet. Every body reacts differently to every diet. It’s all about being informed about all the options and figuring out and deciding which diet works for you. I’ll never poo-poo anyone’s diet if it works. At least you’re trying to be more healthy.

If there’s one thing I learned about diets while I was reading about keto, it was that there’s no “silver bullet” diet. Every body reacts differently to every diet. It’s all about being informed about all the options and figuring out and deciding which diet works for you.

You don't believe there is an optimal diet for us to eat?

Sorry about that, I thought I was being clear. No. I believe every person is different with different sensitivities, different familial traits, different activity levels... etc. Diets are not black and white, they are VERY gray. Knowing how your body reacts to certain foods is critical to making an informed dietary decision. Should a person with gluten intolerance be on the traditional food pyramid diet? Should a diabetic be on the same diet?

I’ll also add that at this point in my life I’ve realized that there is so much bias in everything, and I don’t just mean politics. Take for example the FDA’s food pyramid. Do your own research but generally speaking that thing was developed with big businesses in mind.

I know people that have a personalized diet and exercise program they follow very closely. Each one of their diets are completely different, from high protein “carnivore” style to keto to zone... all different based on the individual requirements each of them have. And these individuals are some of the most finely tuned individuals both physically and cognitively.

Again, I’m not against or for any one diet. Whatever works for whatever your requirements are. and I especially don’t believe that everyone should be on the same diet or even guideline for that matter. I just wish some doctors and nutritionists would open their aperture and realize there are other options out there that could work just as well or better.

 

[TheGLOV]

I have had stage 1 colon cancer (cancer confined to polyp in colon and not spread -- good news) I am trying to increase my odds of avoiding a recurrence. I have easily been able to stop eating beef (switched to chicken), but it is difficult for me to cut down on eggs, which have been implicated to some extent in prostrate cancer and maybe one study dealing with colon cancer. I also exercise 7 days a week, which is supposed to be protective.

I recently came across the work of Dr. John Ioannidis, probably the most respected researcher on the topic of the problems caused by non-reproducible research and he strongly questions most nutritional research and his conclusions have been:

"In a new op-ed in JAMA, Dr. Ioannidis bluntly states that nutrition epidemiology is in need of "radical reform."

********

"Selective reporting means that any study which shows a link between bacon and early death is likelier to be published than one that doesn't show a link. Combined, Dr. Ioannidis believes that residual confounding and selective reporting have created a systemic bias in nutrition research.

Even worse, Dr. Ioannidis blames food and nutrition activists for distorting research.""https://www.acsh.org/news/2018/08/24/john-ioannidis-aims-his-bazooka-nutrition-science-13357 For more background see https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/10/10/modern-scientific-controversies-part-7-the-meat-war/

Had a meeting with my surgeon Tuesday and asked him for his gut reaction to various foods that have been implicated in colon cancer, and he stated that he would stay away from processed foods because they have so many chemicals.

I am not trying to be political here. Simply trying to do everything I can to better my own odds.

Hey Buck, I find blueberries to my liking and are very good cancer fighting agents along with raw spinach sir.

Hope it helps sir.

And try a small piece of sweet, dark chocolate every once and a while to calm your nerves and enjoy a good glass of red wine right after eating the chocolate.

4 oz.

You deserve it sir!

 

[nittanyfan333]

Less worse is not that same same as good.

It is opinion that a vegan diet is optimal. But a lot of research shows it may not be optimal. Vegan is better than SAD but a lot of nutritional experts will tell you it is not optimal.

As nittanyfan333 stated, find what works for you.

Agree with this (not optimal). Especially when taking into consideration essential amino acids. Sure some plant based foods contain all 9 but the levels of some of the essential aminos are very low. For example soy protein is pretty legit minus the fact that it’s very low in tryptophan.

Unless you’re taking all of this into account and augmenting, you need more than just plant based protein.

 

[flash86]

Problems with the Annals article note
D in earlier post:


althoughpublished in Annals of Internal Medicine, there have been a number of quality issues brought up about it. Also, there is concern about undisclosed conflicts and bias ...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ny...didnt-report-past-food-industry-ties.amp.html

Then again, there was an article published in the Annals of Internal Medicine just a couple weeks ago saying that the danger of eating meat has been exaggerated that's not causing an uprorar, and I don't link to a particular article on it because people can google it themselves and see various articles on it taking one slant or another, rather than having the one slant they see be the one I linked to.

 

[nittanyfan333]

Problems with the Annals article note
D in earlier post:


althoughpublished in Annals of Internal Medicine, there have been a number of quality issues brought up about it. Also, there is concern about undisclosed conflicts and bias ...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ny...didnt-report-past-food-industry-ties.amp.html

Then again, there was an article published in the Annals of Internal Medicine just a couple weeks ago saying that the danger of eating meat has been exaggerated that's not causing an uprorar, and I don't link to a particular article on it because people can google it themselves and see various articles on it taking one slant or another, rather than having the one slant they see be the one I linked to.

Conflicts and bias. This goes to exactly what I meant when I said about bias earlier. The following is directly from the article you posted:

“Dr. Laine noted that people on both sides of the meat issue have conflicts of interest. “Many of the people who are criticizing these articles have lots of conflicts of interest they aren’t talking about,” she said. “They do workshops on plant-based diets, do retreats on wellness and write books on plant-based diets. There are conflicts on both sides.”

Dr. Laine said if Dr. Johnston had chosen to disclose a financial relationship with the food industry group, it would not have changed the journal’s decision to publish the research. What matters to the journal editors and peer-review team, she said, is the fact that the group had clear protocols for examining the data and was transparent about its methods.

“I don’t think we would have made a different decision about publishing the manuscript if he had that on his conflicts disclosure,” said Dr. Laine. “We certainly know that in the past he did nutrition research that was funded by industry. It’s a judgment call if that should be disclosed. I think at some level that’s a little bit of noise around this. The methods of what these researchers did and their conclusions are out there, and people can disagree with that.”


This is why I believe it’s so important to do your own research and figure out what works best for you. Too much bias..... everywhere. She even said that the group had clear protocols for data examination and were transparent about their methods, yet others talk about bias and try to discredit the research for, what I can only assess, is to further their own agenda (not directing that at anyone here, but at people in the medical community involved with the study and the subsequent negativity directed at it)

Be an independent thinker and make your own decision based on your own research. I did keto for 7 months. Saw 50 lbs lost, a triglyceride number go from over 400 to ALMOST sub-100, saw LDL go down and HDL go up. For me, the proof of how keto effected me is in the numbers. I get them run every 3 months to see how what I eat and how I exercise affects my actual lipid panel, then adjust as needed.

 

[Kamovitch]

I would recommend eating anything you want. Seriously. It makes little difference. In small amounts and do it in moderation. Enjoy life.

 

[rumble_lion]

Conflicts and bias. This goes to exactly what I meant when I said about bias earlier. The following is directly from the article you posted:

“Dr. Laine noted that people on both sides of the meat issue have conflicts of interest. “Many of the people who are criticizing these articles have lots of conflicts of interest they aren’t talking about,” she said. “They do workshops on plant-based diets, do retreats on wellness and write books on plant-based diets. There are conflicts on both sides.”

Dr. Laine said if Dr. Johnston had chosen to disclose a financial relationship with the food industry group, it would not have changed the journal’s decision to publish the research. What matters to the journal editors and peer-review team, she said, is the fact that the group had clear protocols for examining the data and was transparent about its methods.

“I don’t think we would have made a different decision about publishing the manuscript if he had that on his conflicts disclosure,” said Dr. Laine. “We certainly know that in the past he did nutrition research that was funded by industry. It’s a judgment call if that should be disclosed. I think at some level that’s a little bit of noise around this. The methods of what these researchers did and their conclusions are out there, and people can disagree with that.”


This is why I believe it’s so important to do your own research and figure out what works best for you. Too much bias..... everywhere. She even said that the group had clear protocols for data examination and were transparent about their methods, yet others talk about bias and try to discredit the research for, what I can only assess, is to further their own agenda (not directing that at anyone here, but at people in the medical community involved with the study and the subsequent negativity directed at it)

Be an independent thinker and make your own decision based on your own research. I did keto for 7 months. Saw 50 lbs lost, a triglyceride number go from over 400 to ALMOST sub-100, saw LDL go down and HDL go up. For me, the proof of how keto effected me is in the numbers. I get them run every 3 months to see how what I eat and how I exercise affects my actual lipid panel, then adjust as needed.

“Dr. Laine noted that people on both sides of the meat issue have conflicts of interest. “Many of the people who are criticizing these articles have lots of conflicts of interest they aren’t talking about,” she said. “They do workshops on plant-based diets, do retreats on wellness and write books on plant-based diets. There are conflicts on both sides.”

Look out for big broccoli!

 

[dailybuck777]

If there’s one thing I learned about diets while I was reading about keto, it was that there’s no “silver bullet” diet. Every body reacts differently to every diet. It’s all about being informed about all the options and figuring out and deciding which diet works for you.

You don't believe there is an optimal diet for us to eat?

People react differently to many things. 20 years ago, I had terrible headaches that were not quite migraines. (My head felt like it weighed 200 lbs.) I started regularly exercising and my headaches went away. About 5 years ago, my headaches started coming back. I upped my weight-lifting to every other day. My headaches are completely gone. I know this exercise works for me. Don't know whether it will work for others.

My brother is a vegan and very healthy (he surfs and swims regularly). However, he has lost about 3 inches of height over the last 8 or 10 years. Somehow he got exposed to hepatitis C about 5 years ago. The Interferon treatment (which doesn't always work) was supposed to be very painful. Didn't affect my brother at all and he was completely cured after about 4 months. Don't know why but strongly suspect that being a Vegan played an important role in his very good response to Interferon and his complete cure. Not everyone has the same response to drugs or outside agents.

 

[dailybuck777]

Hey Buck, I just want to say "I luv you man!" -No BS here! Keep on going. You ARE a fighter!!

Win!

WIn!!

WIN!!!

"F-u-c-k Cancer"

Thanks for your very kind words and support and for the kind words and support of many others here. Not being a Penn Stater, I was a little reluctant to post, but I am very happy with the large amount of useful information as well as kindness that I have received.

Should also mention that I had a CEA test Tuesday and it was very low. I believe .61.

 

[Op2]

“Dr. Laine noted that people on both sides of the meat issue have conflicts of interest. “Many of the people who are criticizing these articles have lots of conflicts of interest they aren’t talking about,” she said. “They do workshops on plant-based diets, do retreats on wellness and write books on plant-based diets. There are conflicts on both sides.”

Look out for big broccoli!

People will market anything, including broccoli. The reason Farmer's Markets are a big thing is good marketing. The same goes with organic food. The non-organic equivalent does just as well and costs way less.

I was reading once about broccoli several years ago and it talked about a carcinogen that is in broccoli. Carcinogen has a definition, of which I forget now, but it's something like, a given dose in rats will result in a given cancer risk in rats. Thus, if Substance X does that in rats, then it's defined as a carcinogen.

And broccoli contained said carcinogen. But in order to get that dose in humans, a person would have to consume a ridiculous amount of broccoli that no human could ever consume.

But here is the kicker. That carcinogen in broccoli...in the doses that people DO eat broccoli, that carcinogen is chemopreventative. IOW, there is something in cancer that prevents cancer in the doses at which humans consume broccoli, but that is defined as a carcinogen because a much, much larger dose causes cancer in rats (adjusting for the difference in size between humans and rats).

It's been a long time, but as I recall that was from a decent source instead of a popular media site that will say anything if it gets clicks. I wish I had bookmarked it at the time. Maybe I'll do some research and see if I can find it.

 

[nittanyfan333]

People react differently to many things. 20 years ago, I had terrible headaches that were not quite migraines. (My head felt like it weighed 200 lbs.) I started regularly exercising and my headaches went away. About 5 years ago, my headaches started coming back. I upped my weight-lifting to every other day. My headaches are completely gone. I know this exercise works for me. Don't know whether it will work for others.

My brother is a vegan and very healthy (he surfs and swims regularly). However, he has lost about 3 inches of height over the last 8 or 10 years. Somehow he got exposed to hepatitis C about 5 years ago. The Interferon treatment (which doesn't always work) was supposed to be very painful. Didn't affect my brother at all and he was completely cured after about 4 months. Don't know why but strongly suspect that being a Vegan played an important role in his very good response to Interferon and his complete cure. Not everyone has the same response to drugs or outside agents.

I think you hit the nail on the head about what the big crux is when it comes to medicine (for lack of a better term). We have been studying the human body for years.... decades.... generations... centuries! and we are NOWHERE close to understanding how it works at a molecular level. Sure, we all know how we eat or drink things, it gets digested and turned into energy and whatnot, but what happens at a purely molecular level? Hell, we don't even know exactly how the brain works and how it affects the rest of the body, and that's just 1 organ!

what i'm getting at is everyone affects everyone differently because we're all so different.

Sorry to derail your threat Buck. to digress, I really hope whatever you decide to do or not do helps you out. Praying for you man.

 

[The Spin Meister]

People will market anything, including broccoli. The reason Farmer's Markets are a big thing is good marketing. The same goes with organic food. The non-organic equivalent does just as well and costs way less.

I was reading once about broccoli several years ago and it talked about a carcinogen that is in broccoli. Carcinogen has a definition, of which I forget now, but it's something like, a given dose in rats will result in a given cancer risk in rats. Thus, if Substance X does that in rats, then it's defined as a carcinogen.

And broccoli contained said carcinogen. But in order to get that dose in humans, a person would have to consume a ridiculous amount of broccoli that no human could ever consume.

But here is the kicker. That carcinogen in broccoli...in the doses that people DO eat broccoli, that carcinogen is chemopreventative. IOW, there is something in cancer that prevents cancer in the doses at which humans consume broccoli, but that is defined as a carcinogen because a much, much larger dose causes cancer in rats (adjusting for the difference in size between humans and rats).

It's been a long time, but as I recall that was from a decent source instead of a popular media site that will say anything if it gets clicks. I wish I had bookmarked it at the time. Maybe I'll do some research and see if I can find it.

---
I posted earlier about hormesis, something I had never heard about until someone posted a link to this website earlier in the thread. Sounds like a reasonable explanation about what you said about that carcinogen in broccoli.

We think we know so much but we actually know very little. Fifty years from now, those people will laughing at how backward we are currently. Just like we laugh at leeches.

 

[The Spin Meister]

DB; one aspect that no one has mentioned is having the proper population of intestinal bacteria. In the past ten years, research has shown that intestinal flora is much more critical than previously known. It can affect every thing from immune systems to brain function. They are now treating depression, obesity, and a number of other conditions by manipulating this.

There is a movement of people that eat naturally fermented foods like home made sauerkraut. I have made my own....it is simple and tastes better.

 

[nittanyfan333]

DB; one aspect that no one has mentioned is having the proper population of intestinal bacteria. In the past ten years, research has shown that intestinal flora is much more critical than previously known. It can affect every thing from immune systems to brain function. They are now treating depression, obesity, and a number of other conditions by manipulating this.

There is a movement of people that eat naturally fermented foods like home made sauerkraut. I have made my own....it is simple and tastes better.

Very good point. Dr. Rhonda Patrick is really big on Gut health and biome. I'm getting more and more interested in how it affects overall health. Lots of talk recently about Sauerkraut (like you mentioned) and kim chi and all the other fermented foods.

 

[rumble_lion]

DB; one aspect that no one has mentioned is having the proper population of intestinal bacteria. In the past ten years, research has shown that intestinal flora is much more critical than previously known. It can affect every thing from immune systems to brain function. They are now treating depression, obesity, and a number of other conditions by manipulating this.

There is a movement of people that eat naturally fermented foods like home made sauerkraut. I have made my own....it is simple and tastes better.

So what happens to your gut bacteria if you pack it with meat 3 times a day?

 

[The Spin Meister]

So what happens to your gut bacteria if you pack it with meat 3 times a day?

-----------
No one said to eat meat three times a day or to 'pack it'. Sorry for your lack of comprehension and perspective.

Eating proper amounts of meat would have no detrimental impact on gut flora. Probably would help as it would provide needed protein and fatty acids that vegans don't get.

 

[rumble_lion]

-----------
No one said to eat meat three times a day or to 'pack it'. Sorry for your lack of comprehension and perspective.

Eating proper amounts of meat would have no detrimental impact on gut flora. Probably would help as it would provide needed protein and fatty acids that vegans don't get.

Eating proper amounts of meat would have no detrimental impact on gut flora.

What is the proper amount of meat?

Probably would help as it would provide needed protein and fatty acids that vegans don't get

Well I must say I have never seen anyone recommend to eat meat and fat to have good gut health. I don't think so.

You don't need to eat meat to get the proper amount of protein. That's just marketing.

 

[N&B4PSU]

I have had stage 1 colon cancer (cancer confined to polyp in colon and not spread -- good news) I am trying to increase my odds of avoiding a recurrence. I have easily been able to stop eating beef (switched to chicken), but it is difficult for me to cut down on eggs, which have been implicated to some extent in prostrate cancer and maybe one study dealing with colon cancer. I also exercise 7 days a week, which is supposed to be protective.

I recently came across the work of Dr. John Ioannidis, probably the most respected researcher on the topic of the problems caused by non-reproducible research and he strongly questions most nutritional research and his conclusions have been:

"In a new op-ed in JAMA, Dr. Ioannidis bluntly states that nutrition epidemiology is in need of "radical reform."

********

"Selective reporting means that any study which shows a link between bacon and early death is likelier to be published than one that doesn't show a link. Combined, Dr. Ioannidis believes that residual confounding and selective reporting have created a systemic bias in nutrition research.

Even worse, Dr. Ioannidis blames food and nutrition activists for distorting research.""https://www.acsh.org/news/2018/08/24/john-ioannidis-aims-his-bazooka-nutrition-science-13357 For more background see https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/10/10/modern-scientific-controversies-part-7-the-meat-war/

Had a meeting with my surgeon Tuesday and asked him for his gut reaction to various foods that have been implicated in colon cancer, and he stated that he would stay away from processed foods because they have so many chemicals.

I am not trying to be political here. Simply trying to do everything I can to better my own odds.

First off, good luck to you! Glad you nailed it early, so God speed!

As to Dr. John (my hero), i found his work when trying to figure out why statins seemed to have so many side effects for joe average that rarely got play-time by dr's or anyone else.

John clarified something (and much came out later in support of his other findings).... you take 100 people and feed them a drug. If 60 people drop out from the pool due to side effects they can't endure, the remaining 40 are the only ones whose results matter. The 60 who split are not part of it.

Now, if you tolerated the drug for the entire course, chances are your side effects were mild, so they receive minimal fanfare. But if you asked the 60 who had to leave, they'd light you up with all kinds of horrid side effects... that you won't see in the packaging. Or if you do, they will be treated as outliers.

I remember telling my doctor how horrific they were on my gut and he pish-poshed me with 'no one complains about that.' Uh huh.

Well, turns out a lot of poeple do, but they aren't part of the sample cohort.

Happily off that garbage and instead of living in perpetual hell (and yeah, it was.. tried 5 different versions and all had the same impact). I now live a very happy and healthy lifestyle and have little concern abt choesterol. To those who take them and suffer no side effects, God bless you. Enjoy and stay healthy.

 

[The Spin Meister]

First off, good luck to you! Glad you nailed it early, so God speed!

As to Dr. John (my hero), i found his work when trying to figure out why statins seemed to have so many side effects for joe average that rarely got play-time by dr's or anyone else.

John clarified something (and much came out later in support of his other findings).... you take 100 people and feed them a drug. If 60 people drop out from the pool due to side effects they can't endure, the remaining 40 are the only ones whose results matter. The 60 who split are not part of it.

Now, if you tolerated the drug for the entire course, chances are your side effects were mild, so they receive minimal fanfare. But if you asked the 60 who had to leave, they'd light you up with all kinds of horrid side effects... that you won't see in the packaging. Or if you do, they will be treated as outliers.

I remember telling my doctor how horrific they were on my gut and he pish-poshed me with 'no one complains about that.' Uh huh.

Well, turns out a lot of poeple do, but they aren't part of the sample cohort.

Happily off that garbage and instead of living in perpetual hell (and yeah, it was.. tried 5 different versions and all had the same impact). I now live a very happy and healthy lifestyle and have little concern abt choesterol. To those who take them and suffer no side effects, God bless you. Enjoy and stay healthy.

So what did you do to solve the problem without statins?

 

[N&B4PSU]

So what did you do to solve the problem without statins?

Stopped taking them. Within 72 hrs all my symptoms subsided. Decided there was enough evidence that I was unlikely to croak anytime soon with 240 anymore/less than 175. I do know that i could not continue the course or i'd be living the rest of my agonizing life in the bathroom. that was 7 years ago. My stress tests and BP are great and i'm still in the gym all the time and easily (ok, that's a stretch lol) climbing mountains in foreign lands.

Might keel over tomorrow, but i've lived a great life in those 7 years that would not have happened if i'd stayed on statins.

People can do what they want and I'm good with that... me... I'm pleased how it worked out.

 

[rumble_lion]

Stopped taking them. Within 72 hrs all my symptoms subsided. Decided there was enough evidence that I was unlikely to croak anytime soon with 240 anymore/less than 175. I do know that i could not continue the course or i'd be living the rest of my agonizing life in the bathroom. that was 7 years ago. My stress tests and BP are great and i'm still in the gym all the time and easily (ok, that's a stretch lol) climbing mountains in foreign lands.

Might keel over tomorrow, but i've lived a great life in those 7 years that would not have happened if i'd stayed on statins.

People can do what they want and I'm good with that... me... I'm pleased how it worked out.

Stopped taking them. Within 72 hrs all my symptoms subsided. Decided there was enough evidence that I was unlikely to croak anytime soon with 240 anymore/less than 175.

I know this is a completely crazy idea but have you ever considered not eating foods that have cholesterol?

 

[N&B4PSU]

Stopped taking them. Within 72 hrs all my symptoms subsided. Decided there was enough evidence that I was unlikely to croak anytime soon with 240 anymore/less than 175.

I know this is a completely crazy idea but have you ever considered not eating foods that have cholesterol?

Kinda narrows the food pool down, lol. Pretty sure research shows food cholesterol levels have minimal impact on your numbers. Frankly, i'm happy where i am. Maybe I'll regret it 10 years from now, but if my next 10 years are as good as the previous 7, I call it a win.

BTW.. I have a friend whose chol is 270ish. Doc puts him on stats. He crashes... winds up in ICU for a week near death. Turns out those bad boys were not good for him. Now he IS an outlier... but it does get one's attention when an otherwise perfectly healthy guy is suddenly comatose. [Odd thing... despite not taking meds hios chol is still 270...15 years later.]

He's fine, now. No more meds for him.

To each his/her own... live and (hopefully) let live

 

[rumble_lion]

I have had stage 1 colon cancer (cancer confined to polyp in colon and not spread -- good news) I am trying to increase my odds of avoiding a recurrence. I have easily been able to stop eating beef (switched to chicken), but it is difficult for me to cut down on eggs, which have been implicated to some extent in prostrate cancer and maybe one study dealing with colon cancer. I also exercise 7 days a week, which is supposed to be protective.

I recently came across the work of Dr. John Ioannidis, probably the most respected researcher on the topic of the problems caused by non-reproducible research and he strongly questions most nutritional research and his conclusions have been:

"In a new op-ed in JAMA, Dr. Ioannidis bluntly states that nutrition epidemiology is in need of "radical reform."

********

"Selective reporting means that any study which shows a link between bacon and early death is likelier to be published than one that doesn't show a link. Combined, Dr. Ioannidis believes that residual confounding and selective reporting have created a systemic bias in nutrition research.

Even worse, Dr. Ioannidis blames food and nutrition activists for distorting research.""https://www.acsh.org/news/2018/08/24/john-ioannidis-aims-his-bazooka-nutrition-science-13357 For more background see https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/10/10/modern-scientific-controversies-part-7-the-meat-war/

Had a meeting with my surgeon Tuesday and asked him for his gut reaction to various foods that have been implicated in colon cancer, and he stated that he would stay away from processed foods because they have so many chemicals.

I am not trying to be political here. Simply trying to do everything I can to better my own odds.

This might be of interest to you.

 

[rumble_lion]

Kinda narrows the food pool down, lol. Pretty sure research shows food cholesterol levels have minimal impact on your numbers. Frankly, i'm happy where i am. Maybe I'll regret it 10 years from now, but if my next 10 years are as good as the previous 7, I call it a win.

BTW.. I have a friend whose chol is 270ish. Doc puts him on stats. He crashes... winds up in ICU for a week near death. Turns out those bad boys were not good for him. Now he IS an outlier... but it does get one's attention when an otherwise perfectly healthy guy is suddenly comatose. [Odd thing... despite not taking meds hios chol is still 270...15 years later.]

He's fine, now. No more meds for him.

To each his/her own... live and (hopefully) let live

Kinda narrows the food pool down, lol. Pretty sure research shows food cholesterol levels have minimal impact on your numbers.

Well first the good news.

You probably have your cholesterol measured after fasting right? Your body makes all the cholesterol you need - any cholesterol you eat will have to be filtered out of your system by your liver in 4-6 hours. So if you fast before your blood is drawn then you are exactly right - the cholesterol you eat won't affect your numbers.

So that is good news kinda.

The bad news is that your cholesterol levels during most of the day will be higher than your tested "number" since the cholesterol you eat will spike those numbers up higher for 4-6 hours. What is your true cholesterol level if you have bacon and eggs for breakfast then a cheeseburger and fries for lunch and and pepperoni pizza for dinner?

 

[N&B4PSU]

Kinda narrows the food pool down, lol. Pretty sure research shows food cholesterol levels have minimal impact on your numbers.

Well first the good news.

You probably have your cholesterol measured after fasting right? Your body makes all the cholesterol you need - any cholesterol you eat will have to be filtered out of your system by your liver in 4-6 hours. So if you fast before your blood is drawn then you are exactly right - the cholesterol you eat won't affect your numbers.

So that is good news kinda.

The bad news is that your cholesterol levels during most of the day will be higher than your tested "number" since the cholesterol you eat will spike those numbers up higher for 4-6 hours. What is your true cholesterol level if you have bacon and eggs for breakfast then a cheeseburger and fries for lunch and and pepperoni pizza for dinner?

View embedded media

Found this and I agree: "However, if you ate a cheeseburger every day, that probably would affect your numbers. Cholesterol levels are affected by what you eat over time. If you regularly eat foods that are high in saturated fat – such as cheeseburgers, full-fat cheese, and fatty cuts of meat – that can raise your cholesterol levels. Foods high in trans fats (fast-food fries, crackers, chips, packaged baked goods) and in cholesterol (egg yolks, full-fat dairy, organ meats) also can raise your levels."

Aside from cruises (where bacon is my friennnnd) I rarely eat foods high in cholesterol. Period. Aside from demon alcohol, I'm a healthy eater. But I'd wager if I ran my life campaign as I do on vacation, i'd be in deep kimshee.

This last extended vacation was an exception (plenty of bacon followed by 4 serious burger days in OZ) but i'm back to reality where chicken and fish reign lol.

I'm a big fan of minimizing splurges and keeping to a healthy diet with lots of gym time (what I love about cruises -- among ogther things) is that it means a minimum of 5 days per week hitting the steel)... a lot harder to do back home.