Guest guest Posted January 14, 2003 Report Share Posted January 14, 2003 Hi Just this morning I read the pages in Metabolic Typing (p. 178-180) that I think you are referring to (although I'm sure there are other pages with the same confusion). I agree that his use of the word 'fat' is confusing if you are thinking in terms of percent of calories as fat or protein, because most of the time he really means 'fatty foods' or 'protein foods'. So a meal that is approx. 30% fatty foods and 40% protein foods may very well contain 20-25% protein calories and 60-70% fat calories, but equal grams of fat and protein! - Actually the meal would probably have more grams of fat than protein. I should write the authors about this. I wrote some notes in my copy to correct this problem in case someone else wants to read my copy. Kris > In a message dated 1/13/03 5:35:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, > kris.johnson@... writes: > > > I just got Metabolic Typing, and have only read halfway thru it, but it > > strikes me that often when people talk about 'protein', what they really > > mean is 'protein foods' (meat, fish, eggs, etc.), which can easily have 50% > > fat calories or more. Maybe that is why his fat recommendations don't make > > sense. > > That's possible, I didn't even think of it. However, that's VERY confusing, > since that's such an unprecise and unusual way to calculate macronutrients. > I wonder though... what then is my whole milk yogurt? It has an equal > proportion of protein and fat gram for gram... is it a protein or a fat? > It's listed under his protein list, but has more fat than anything else in > caloric value. > > Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 14, 2003 Report Share Posted January 14, 2003 Hi Kris, Well, if that's the case, that cures quite a bit of my disagreement... that might be why in one chart he uses the plural " proteins " in the percentage. It's quite confusing, especially since it is currently popular to use percentage of calories, which is obviously much more reliable and precise. If you're right, that also explains how Mercola deduced from MTD that he needed 40-50% of calories from fat, when MTD never suggests that percentage for anyone. So I suppose he means 40% in VOLUME of meat or some protein product, and then 30% of VOLUME being added fats in the form of butter or oils? Chris In a message dated 1/14/03 11:02:21 AM Eastern Standard Time, kris.johnson@... writes: > Hi > > Just this morning I read the pages in Metabolic Typing (p. 178-180) that I > think you are referring to (although I'm sure there are other pages with the > same confusion). I agree that his use of the word 'fat' is confusing if you > are thinking in terms of percent of calories as fat or protein, because most > of the time he really means 'fatty foods' or 'protein foods'. So a meal that > is approx. 30% fatty foods and 40% protein foods may very well contain > 20-25% protein calories and 60-70% fat calories, but equal grams of fat and > protein! - Actually the meal would probably have more grams of fat than > protein. > > I should write the authors about this. I wrote some notes in my copy to > correct this problem in case someone else wants to read my copy. > ____ " What can one say of a soul, of a heart, filled with compassion? It is a heart which burns with love for every creature: for human beings, birds, and animals, for serpents and for demons. The thought of them and the sight of them make the tears of the saint flow. And this immense and intense compassion, which flows from the heart of the saints, makes them unable to bear the sight of the smallest, most insignificant wound in any creature. Thus they pray ceaselessly, with tears, even for animals, for enemies of the truth, and for those who do them wrong. " --Saint Isaac the Syrian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 14, 2003 Report Share Posted January 14, 2003 In a message dated 1/14/03 1:03:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, talithakumi@... writes: > It's documented that the apostles picked wheat right > off the plant and ate them. Who said the Apostles were healthy, or chose their eating habits to be healthy? Is living off bread and water healthy? Going 40 days without food? They may well have been occupied with other things... And the unleavened bread was indeed only several days a year. Chris ____ " What can one say of a soul, of a heart, filled with compassion? It is a heart which burns with love for every creature: for human beings, birds, and animals, for serpents and for demons. The thought of them and the sight of them make the tears of the saint flow. And this immense and intense compassion, which flows from the heart of the saints, makes them unable to bear the sight of the smallest, most insignificant wound in any creature. Thus they pray ceaselessly, with tears, even for animals, for enemies of the truth, and for those who do them wrong. " --Saint Isaac the Syrian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 14, 2003 Report Share Posted January 14, 2003 I've mentioned the ease of counting only macronutrients before with metabolic typing for me. Of course with meat theres protein and fat, carbs with or without fat and dairy with protein, fat and carbs. All dependant on type, proportion and reason for fat content to look low. If your ingredients are nutrient dense and as close to their state in nature as possible that does the remainder of the counting. Another thought is metabolic typing is not for weight loss or to cure anything in particular. Its for the individual to feed their body to hopefully achieve better health and their true body. I may be misunderstanding or have oversimplified. Wanita At 11:01 AM 1/14/03 -0500, you wrote: >Hi > >Just this morning I read the pages in Metabolic Typing (p. 178-180) that I >think you are referring to (although I'm sure there are other pages with the >same confusion). I agree that his use of the word 'fat' is confusing if you >are thinking in terms of percent of calories as fat or protein, because most >of the time he really means 'fatty foods' or 'protein foods'. So a meal that >is approx. 30% fatty foods and 40% protein foods may very well contain >20-25% protein calories and 60-70% fat calories, but equal grams of fat and >protein! - Actually the meal would probably have more grams of fat than >protein. > >I should write the authors about this. I wrote some notes in my copy to >correct this problem in case someone else wants to read my copy. > >Kris > >> In a message dated 1/13/03 5:35:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, >> kris.johnson@... writes: >> >> > I just got Metabolic Typing, and have only read halfway thru it, but it >> > strikes me that often when people talk about 'protein', what they >really >> > mean is 'protein foods' (meat, fish, eggs, etc.), which can easily have >50% >> > fat calories or more. Maybe that is why his fat recommendations don't >make >> > sense. >> >> That's possible, I didn't even think of it. However, that's VERY >confusing, >> since that's such an unprecise and unusual way to calculate >macronutrients. >> I wonder though... what then is my whole milk yogurt? It has an equal >> proportion of protein and fat gram for gram... is it a protein or a fat? >> It's listed under his protein list, but has more fat than anything else in >> caloric value. >> >> Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 14, 2003 Report Share Posted January 14, 2003 Hi : See comments below. > > >Couldn't the same be said for people who are guten intolerant? > > No, not exactly. > > Gluten was almost nonexistent in the foods we evolved in. #### Ah, this idea works if the popular belief of evolution is correct. If we didn't evolve like some theorize we did, then the perception of what we originally ate would probably be different. There are many discrepancies with the ideas of evolution which are not commonly known and which seem to indicate that the earth is much younger we have been lead to believe. Observations have been made on things like the rate of helium being released in to the air. At the current rate, the air should be saturated with helium, but it is not. The sun is said to be shrinking at a constant rate of something like five feet per hour, and at that rate, the sun would have been touching the earth with the age that is given to the earth. The roch (sp?) limit of the distance of the moon from the earth is also problematic because at the rate it is currently moving along with its pull, it is believed that with the age given the earth, the earth would possibly be shaped differently. The doppler effect of blue and red shifts are not uniform in deep space. The Grand Canyon is becoming known for an extraordinary fossil deposit. Geologists have inventoried unusual fossils called nautiloids within the cliff-forming Redwall Limestone. Nautiloids are marine animals resembling a squid that lived within long, slender shells. Billions of large orthocone nautiloids up to six feet in length occur within a single seven-foot-thick layer that extends from Marble Canyon in extreme eastern Grand Canyon 180 miles westward to Lake Mead Boulevard in Las Vegas, Nevada. How do those fossils end up there with the " slow millions of years " of erosion? The work of Gentry regarding radio active halos also indicate that the earth is not as old as popularly believed. Then take a look at the way they date fossils. The complexity of human, animal, and plant life. I've heard that evolution is something like a stack of cards being thrown out of a flying plane, and the stack of cards landing on the ground all in one pile and in complete order. Life is far too complex for random chance to have created it. With all these discrepancies, I wouldn't be at all surprised that the understanding of gluten in the human body is wrong. One great thing about Price's work is that he was able to actually " observe " the effects of diet on man and animals. True science is observation. When we try to determine what was eaten by prehistoric man, things become highly " speculative, " and not conclusive. Evolution is accepted on faith, not observation. On the otherhand, the value of Price's work is " not " in the area of speculation he had done but on the mass amounts of observation he had made. This puts Price's work based on observation far and high above the highly speculative work based on " presumed " eons of human evolution. It might have > made up 5% of the proto-grains that were available before agriculture, but > modern wheat has been bred for the highest possible gluten content, and > more than 55% of it can be gluten. Though I think the current obsession > with gluten neglects to consider the harmful effect of the starches in > grains, especially in grains that haven't been properly prepared, there's > no doubt that gluten is very difficult to digest, and isn't a protein we've > had much chance to adapt to at all. #### I agree that the manipulation of wheat could be problematic, but wheat appears to have been consumed in various ways among older groups of people. As I mentioned previously, the Hunza did not always sprout their wheat and were considered quite healthy. The Israelites ate their wheat leavened " and " unleavened. The book of Ruth describes them eating the wheat parched (possibly unsprouted). It's documented that the apostles picked wheat right off the plant and ate them. But, I do agree that today's methods of growing wheat and preparing it (i.e. steel ground instead of stone ground, etc.) is probably contributing to the problems with wheat along with the already declining health of people.. .. And looking > around me, I don't see too many robustly healthy people. In fact, I hardly > know any. We've become conditioned to accept all sorts of disease > conditions as " normal " . By any rational standard, what we consider > " healthy " is really out of shape, sickly and weak. #### Agreed. Marla Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 14, 2003 Report Share Posted January 14, 2003 Marla- >Ah, this idea works if the popular belief of evolution is correct. If >we didn't evolve like some theorize we did, then the perception of what we >originally ate would probably be different. OK, I'll say right now, as diplomatically as I can, that I'm not interested in debating evolution. However, unless you're a literalist Biblical creationist who believes the world was created six thousand some odd years ago, it's beyond question that agriculture is a recent development, and that grains have changed radically since the inception of agriculture. Going from 5% to 55% gluten and drastically increasing their starch content are just two examples. So whether we were created or evolved, modern grains aren't suited to our systems. >The Israelites ate their wheat leavened > " and " unleavened. As I understand, they ate unleavened wheat for a few days each year as part of some sort of religious observance, not as a regular, ongoing element of their diet. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 14, 2003 Report Share Posted January 14, 2003 Many people have done my detox program and then been able to eat foods they were previously 'allergic' to. Large amounts of friendly bacteria and enzymes are integral to the program, as well as quite a few other things, chris >From: Idol <Idol@...> >Reply- > >Subject: Re: Metabolic Typing >Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 13:59:12 -0500 > >Chris- > > >In short, I wonder how much biochemical individuality is the normal state >of > >humanity and how much it is a disease state of modern civilization. > >This is exactly what I've been wondering for quite awhile now. I've long >suspected, for example, that people who " don't tolerate " animal foods >merely have digestive impairments that need to be repaired, not some >natural need to avoid animal foods. I'm sure there's some biochemical >individuality, but as you suggest, a lot of what we're seeing today is >undoubtedly biochemically individualized disease. > >And like you, I think the idea that people's fat consumption should range >from 10-30% of their caloric intake depending on their type is ludicrous. > > > > >- > Many people have done my detox program and then been able to eat foods they were previously 'allergic' to. Large amounts of friendly bacteria and enzymes are integral to the program, as well as quite a few other things, chris >From: Idol <Idol@...> >Reply- > >Subject: Re: Metabolic Typing >Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 13:59:12 -0500 > >Chris- > > >In short, I wonder how much biochemical individuality is the normal state >of > >humanity and how much it is a disease state of modern civilization. > >This is exactly what I've been wondering for quite awhile now. I've long >suspected, for example, that people who " don't tolerate " animal foods >merely have digestive impairments that need to be repaired, not some >natural need to avoid animal foods. I'm sure there's some biochemical >individuality, but as you suggest, a lot of what we're seeing today is >undoubtedly biochemically individualized disease. > >And like you, I think the idea that people's fat consumption should range >from 10-30% of their caloric intake depending on their type is ludicrous. > > > > >- > _________________________________________________________________ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 14, 2003 Report Share Posted January 14, 2003 Hi Chris: > > > It's documented that the apostles picked wheat right > > off the plant and ate them. > > Who said the Apostles were healthy, or chose their eating habits to be > healthy? Is living off bread and water healthy? Going 40 days without food? > They may well have been occupied with other things... > #### Jesus healed people. Health was a big issue. wrote that " All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. " writes in Romans that, " men hold on to a form of godliness, but deny its power. " Many people study the Bible, but they don't believe it. I'm not sure what the health of the apostles were, although I thought that they adhered to Jewish laws (prior to Jesus's teachings) and thus eating the wheat right off the plant didn't seem to be such a negative thing or unkosher. Also, I don't think the apostles only lived on bread and water. A lot of the apostles were fishermen. They are known to have eaten fish and fed the multitudes with fish and bread. Many people fast for cleansing purposes and many have used fasting for healing as well. That may not have been Jesus's purpose for fasting, nor do I think that His fast was documented for that purpose. Just because Jesus got a crown of thorns put on His head, doesn't mean I think I should do that for health. My posts were not intended to discuss evolution or the Bible, but rather to point out that I think the conclusions regarding health, based on humanistic or atheistic " philosophies, " are amiss. Again, this list is based on Price's observations and going beyond observations to " ideas " for which evidence is poorly lacking is probably leading to eroneous conclusions. > And the unleavened bread was indeed only several days a year. #### Yes, but that doesn't explain the good health of the Hunzas. And, are we absolutely certain that the Israelites ate unleavened bread " only " during passover? Marla Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 --- In , " Marla " <talithakumi@e...> wrote: > Hi Chris: > > > > > > It's documented that the apostles picked wheat right > > > off the plant and ate them. > > > > Who said the Apostles were healthy, or chose their eating habits to be > > healthy? Is living off bread and water healthy? Going 40 days without > food? > > They may well have been occupied with other things... > > > > #### Jesus healed people. Health was a big issue. wrote that " All > things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was > made. " writes in Romans that, " men hold on to a form of godliness, but > deny its power. " Many people study the Bible, but they don't believe it. > <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Marla: It's interesting too what the Roman historians wrote about Jesus. I don't have the historian's names however they documented some things Jesus did. Dennis > I'm not sure what the health of the apostles were, although I thought that > they adhered to Jewish laws (prior to Jesus's teachings) and thus eating the > wheat right off the plant didn't seem to be such a negative thing or > unkosher. Also, I don't think the apostles only lived on bread and water. > A lot of the apostles were fishermen. They are known to have eaten fish and > fed the multitudes with fish and bread. Many people fast for cleansing > purposes and many have used fasting for healing as well. That may not have > been Jesus's purpose for fasting, nor do I think that His fast was > documented for that purpose. <><<><><><><><Marla:It's also amazing that just prior to Noah's flood people lived nearly 400 years. And perhaps equally amazing many, many cultures have documented that flood. Dennis Just because Jesus got a crown of thorns put > on His head, doesn't mean I think I should do that for health. > > My posts were not intended to discuss evolution or the Bible, but rather to > point out that I think the conclusions regarding health, based on humanistic > or atheistic " philosophies, " are amiss. Again, this list is based on > Price's observations and going beyond observations to " ideas " for which > evidence is poorly lacking is probably leading to eroneous conclusions. > > > And the unleavened bread was indeed only several days a year. > <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Marla: What did they leaven bread with? Kefir? Dennis > #### Yes, but that doesn't explain the good health of the Hunzas. And, are > we absolutely certain that the Israelites ate unleavened bread " only " during > passover? > > Marla Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 Quoting " dkemnitz2000 <dkemnitz2000@...> " <dkemnitz2000@...>: > <><<><><><><>< No pun intended? > Marla:It's also amazing that just prior to Noah's flood > people lived nearly 400 years. And perhaps equally amazing many, > many cultures have documented that flood. Dennis Floods are common occurrences in many parts of the world, and if I'm not mistaken, their accounts of who survived the floods and how differ considerably. > Marla: What did they leaven bread with? Kefir? Dennis Could be, but I'd guesss that they leavened the bread with environmental yeasts and bacteria as in the procedure described in NT. -- Berg bberg@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 I don't think you could say 30% of volume is butter and oils, as he includes fatty meats in the 30% fat (fatty foods). It's really a pretty crude way of explaining how much to eat to meet the objectives of the diet. I usually figure to get enough protein at a meal (say 3 oz), and limit carbs, which are not so easy to count if your cooking gets at all complex, as mine does, and then pile on some fat here and there, without worrying too much about just how much. If we don't get hungry for 4 hours I figure we've had enough fat. If you had a really handy nutrient analysis program that you could add new ingredients to from a data base on the web, you could really work out what you should eat. But believe me that is a lot of work! Even for only 2 or 3 days. Kris > Hi Kris, > > Well, if that's the case, that cures quite a bit of my disagreement... that > might be why in one chart he uses the plural " proteins " in the percentage. > It's quite confusing, especially since it is currently popular to use > percentage of calories, which is obviously much more reliable and precise. > If you're right, that also explains how Mercola deduced from MTD that he > needed 40-50% of calories from fat, when MTD never suggests that percentage > for anyone. > > So I suppose he means 40% in VOLUME of meat or some protein product, and then > 30% of VOLUME being added fats in the form of butter or oils? > > Chris > > In a message dated 1/14/03 11:02:21 AM Eastern Standard Time, > kris.johnson@... writes: > > > Hi > > > > Just this morning I read the pages in Metabolic Typing (p. 178-180) that I > > think you are referring to (although I'm sure there are other pages with > the > > same confusion). I agree that his use of the word 'fat' is confusing if you > > are thinking in terms of percent of calories as fat or protein, because > most > > of the time he really means 'fatty foods' or 'protein foods'. So a meal > that > > is approx. 30% fatty foods and 40% protein foods may very well contain > > 20-25% protein calories and 60-70% fat calories, but equal grams of fat and > > protein! - Actually the meal would probably have more grams of fat than > > protein. > > > > I should write the authors about this. I wrote some notes in my copy to > > correct this problem in case someone else wants to read my copy. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 I think the publisher often pushes these authors to put something in about losing weight because they think the book will sell better. The book does mention weight loss at times, and it's an advertizing point on the cover, but I don't think that is the main point of the book, either. Kris <I've mentioned the ease of counting only macronutrients before with metabolic typing for me. Of course with meat theres protein and fat, carbs with or without fat and dairy with protein, fat and carbs. All dependant on type, proportion and reason for fat content to look low. If your ingredients are nutrient dense and as close to their state in nature as possible that does the remainder of the counting. Another thought is metabolic typing is not for weight loss or to cure anything in particular. Its for the individual to feed their body to hopefully achieve better health and their true body. I may be misunderstanding or have oversimplified. Wanita Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 Marla, I'm sorry for not being clearer. By referring to bread and water and fasting 40 days I didn't mean to imply the apostles did that as a general rule, but, for example, ate only bread and water; (if wrote that letter) suggested he add wine because his fasting was giving him ailments. Jesus fasted for 40 days, and others in the early/early midieval church performed similar bouts of ascetecism-- Chrysostom fasted for 40 or 50 days, I forget which. But since the theology of health is a little too off topic... I'm not sure there is any biblical evidence that the apostles ate *all* their wheat right off the plant. If you are hungry in the present moment, and you are in a wheat field, you're not going to make a slow rise bread-- you're going to take what food is available. The fact that ate only bread and water indicates that it was common in Christian circles of the apostolic age to make bread. Aren't the Hunzas the ones we talked about earlier in the phytic acid thread who eat most of their grain sprouted? Little or moderate amounts of phytic acid in the diet I wouldn't expect to pose health problems, especially if the majority of foods yielding the nutrients that the phytates bind up and prepared properly. Phytic acid binds healthful and unhealthful metals, so if the healthful ones are abundant enough in the diet small amounts of phytates might actually be good. But if one consumes a large amount of grains, and doesn't properly prepare any of them, one risks nutrien deficiencies. Chris In a message dated 1/14/03 5:30:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, talithakumi@... writes: > #### Jesus healed people. Health was a big issue. wrote that " All > things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was > made. " writes in Romans that, " men hold on to a form of godliness, but > deny its power. " Many people study the Bible, but they don't believe it. > > I'm not sure what the health of the apostles were, although I thought that > they adhered to Jewish laws (prior to Jesus's teachings) and thus eating the > wheat right off the plant didn't seem to be such a negative thing or > unkosher. Also, I don't think the apostles only lived on bread and water. > A lot of the apostles were fishermen. They are known to have eaten fish and > fed the multitudes with fish and bread. Many people fast for cleansing > purposes and many have used fasting for healing as well. That may not have > been Jesus's purpose for fasting, nor do I think that His fast was > documented for that purpose. Just because Jesus got a crown of thorns put > on His head, doesn't mean I think I should do that for health. > > My posts were not intended to discuss evolution or the Bible, but rather to > point out that I think the conclusions regarding health, based on humanistic > or atheistic " philosophies, " are amiss. Again, this list is based on > Price's observations and going beyond observations to " ideas " for which > evidence is poorly lacking is probably leading to eroneous conclusions. > > > And the unleavened bread was indeed only several days a year. > > #### Yes, but that doesn't explain the good health of the Hunzas. And, are > we absolutely certain that the Israelites ate unleavened bread " only " during > passover? ____ " What can one say of a soul, of a heart, filled with compassion? It is a heart which burns with love for every creature: for human beings, birds, and animals, for serpents and for demons. The thought of them and the sight of them make the tears of the saint flow. And this immense and intense compassion, which flows from the heart of the saints, makes them unable to bear the sight of the smallest, most insignificant wound in any creature. Thus they pray ceaselessly, with tears, even for animals, for enemies of the truth, and for those who do them wrong. " --Saint Isaac the Syrian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 In a message dated 1/14/03 11:16:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, kris.johnson@... writes: > If you had a really handy nutrient analysis program that you could add > new ingredients to from a data base on the web, you could really work out > what you should eat. But believe me that is a lot of work! Even for only 2 > or 3 days. Barry Sears has a wonderful " block " method, where he considers a meal to be made of three or four " blocks " each of protein, carb, and fat, depending on your needs, and includes appendices and even a whole separate book on the block value of foods. That's assuming you want to keep his macronutrient ratios. Chris ____ " What can one say of a soul, of a heart, filled with compassion? It is a heart which burns with love for every creature: for human beings, birds, and animals, for serpents and for demons. The thought of them and the sight of them make the tears of the saint flow. And this immense and intense compassion, which flows from the heart of the saints, makes them unable to bear the sight of the smallest, most insignificant wound in any creature. Thus they pray ceaselessly, with tears, even for animals, for enemies of the truth, and for those who do them wrong. " --Saint Isaac the Syrian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 How does your detox program work, Chris? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 Sounds interesting. What is better about that than just fasting? And how much does your cleansing program aproximately come to? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 Dr. Mike thought there had been some compromising on this book to the mass market in a prior discussion and I agreed. Would have liked to see more reasoning on fats myself but further reading was given. Wanita At 11:22 PM 1/14/03 -0500, you wrote: >I think the publisher often pushes these authors to put something in about >losing weight because they think the book will sell better. The book does >mention weight loss at times, and it's an advertizing point on the cover, >but I don't think that is the main point of the book, either. > >Kris > ><I've mentioned the ease of counting only macronutrients before with >metabolic >typing for me. Of course with meat theres protein and fat, carbs with or >without fat and dairy with protein, fat and carbs. All dependant on type, >proportion and reason for fat content to look low. If your ingredients are >nutrient dense and as close to their state in nature as possible that does >the >remainder of the counting. Another thought is metabolic typing is not for >weight loss or to cure anything in particular. Its for the individual to >feed >their body to hopefully achieve better health and their true body. I may be >misunderstanding or have oversimplified. > >Wanita > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 Well, a little backgroud first. I did the Arise & Shine 'Clean-me-out' program several years ago with great success, and then started distributing for them, untill they got shut down here in australia largely due to the content of Lobelia, which is one of the best herbs on the planet. So, i decided to design my own program, similar to the Arise & Shine one, but with a few modifications. The Arise & Shine program advocates a totally vegan diet, which i believe is benificial for many for a short period, but not everyone. the problem which i became aware of was that many people had great difficulty digesting protein. So my program contains large quantities of the Grainfields predigested formulas (these contain spirulina, whey, alfalfa, flax, mung, oats, wheat, rye, wheatgrass, barleygrass, alfalfa grass, etc, all in a predigested state using a several week long process with 12 different freindly bacteria & 3 different aerobic yeasts), which provides plenty of easily assimilable amino acids, as well as EFA's, chlorophyll, bacteria, etc. I then added alfalfa tablets (bowell scrubber), aloe vera juice, liquid probiotic (grainfields liquid), revplus (liquid greens concentrate, also predigested with bacteria), freeze dried green papaya powder (this provide large quatities of papain, which digests protein in any pH, or in the case of the cleanse, it digests previosly undigested protein deposited in the body, known as trapped plasma protein or muco protein), Beyond Greens (Udo Erasmus's Formula), Colloidal Minerals (from Enzymes International), Sensitive Leaf (mimosa pudica-this herb is the best i've found for restoring nerve supply to the body), a blend of herbs to assist the circulation/endocrine glands/lymph/immune system & also to help get a good nights sleep (i use all organically grown herbs) & the actuall bowell cleaning formula which removes the mucoid plaque (accumulated fecal matter adhering to the lining of the intestines which becomes hardened and is very diificult to remove) the program goes for 4 weeks, and is pretty much a raw vega diet (except for the grainfields powder) allowing the body to become very alkaline in order to eliminate large quantities of acid wastes and toxins. Its quite intensive, as when on the cleanse your taking stuff every hour and a half from 6am till 9pm. I also do a iris check before and after the cleanse (the changes in the iris/sclera are often phenomenal), and i suggest people consider doing a live blood analysis before, during and after the cleanse as well. Enemas or colonics are also encouraged, plus we provide supportive herbal formulas for specific body malfunctions. (ie cedar berries for the pancreas, licorice for the adrenals, etc) I think thats it! Should anyone be interested, i can organise for you to get all these products at wholesale. I've spentthe last 7 years perfecting the program (and i still am), and the products i've chosen are the best i've found. Ciao, chris >From: SbrHaub@... >Reply- > >Subject: Re: Metabolic Typing >Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 12:11:50 EST > >How does your detox program work, Chris? _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 Well, we're trying to encourage the body to eliminate this mucoid plaque, which is difficult to do. I've spoken to many colonic irrigationists, fasters, naturopaths, raw fooders, etc, who've never seen this stuff! And belive me, when it comes out, you take notice. this is just the beginning however. We often get people expelling cancerous and precancerous material from thier bowels (as confirmed by surgeons), parasites, and more. The important differance is we're not just about detoxing, but also rebuilding the body. In my opinion, while fasting has some short term benifit (of course theres many types of fasts), in the long term it actually weakens the body. I've seen this in the iris, where an individuals iris fibres will recede (not a good thing) after several fasts (esp long term juice fasts). On my program (and and good nutritional diet) the fibres come forward, which is a sign of healing. the other advantage of the cleanse is that whilst your eliminating large quantities of junk, you will generally still feel relatively good most of the time, rather than feeling rotten. this is because of all the suportive stuff we do (supplements, herbs, colonics, etc) Basically, the results speak for themselves. as for the price, we charge AUS$580 retail for the program (approx 1/2 in US$) which includes ongoing support, iris analysis, etc. Many of the products i import from the Us cause they're not avail here. If you did it there, it'd probably be cheaper overall, but the grainfields is made here (which i consider one of the main ingredients), so you'd have to order it either from here or canada (theres an importer there). Hope that helps, Chris >From: SbrHaub@... >Reply- > >Subject: Re: Metabolic Typing >Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 14:31:09 EST > >Sounds interesting. What is better about that than just fasting? And how >much >does your cleansing program aproximately come to? _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 16, 2003 Report Share Posted January 16, 2003 Marla, I think we more or less agree. You didn't use the word " most " in the other thread, but that was the impression I got, if they ate wheat without sprouting, but ate a variety of other grains/beans sprouted, I just assumed, perhaps wrongly, that if one plant was not sprouted but numerous others were, that they were eating much more sprouts than unsprouted grain. I haven't researched wheat enough to make any claims for it or against it. Concerning going barefoot, what do you think are it's health benefits, and what do you think of the concerns of some about parasite infections in the foot? (Considering the cleanliness of our asphault versus the ground in a non-modernized less populated society). Chris In a message dated 1/16/03 1:42:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, talithakumi@... writes: > ### I don't think I said " most " of their grains were sprouted, but rather > that they ate lots of sprouts. (I'll have to look for my old post. . . > Sorry if I used the wrong wording.) The bread the Hunza are said to have > eaten were/are called chappati. Banik described them as " ubiquitous. " It > appeared to be a regular main staple made of either wheat or millet, baked > or deep-fried, and served with accompanying food. When the grain was > harvested, it was ground in stone mills and stored for future use in > containers similar to our round grain bins. I don't know how long they > stored this. No mention of soaking. Tobe also wrote a book on the > Hunza where he describes that they just mixed the bread with water and > cooked it into flat breads. (I should check that book out from the library > again to get the details.) Banik wrote that they soaked beans and peas in > water for one or two days, and then spread the seeds out on wet cloths in > the sun. They are eaten raw when they begin to sprout. He didn't mention > wheat sprouts, although I realize that that doesn't mean they didn't sprout > them too to eat raw. > > I'm not trying to convince you that you should eat wheat, but that I think > certain things are being ignored about it. I think it's possible that wheat > is being demonized more than it should be. Naturally, people who don't > tolerate it should avoid it, but to say that we weren't designed to eat it > period seems wrong to me. There is more to health than just what we eat (or > not eat), how much we exercise, and the toxins in the environment. There's > attitude as well that makes us sick. It has been documented that negative > emotions (i.e. anger, greed, envy, etc.) also depress the immune system as > well as stress. We have lost connection with the soil which is also healing > to the body. You may have read about the healing properties of clay and > sand, etc. Many civilized people don't even like to go out barefooted and > spend too much time indoors. We pollute our minds with negative things > every day. We tend to lean too much on one side. Life operates best in > balance. > > Marla > ____ " What can one say of a soul, of a heart, filled with compassion? It is a heart which burns with love for every creature: for human beings, birds, and animals, for serpents and for demons. The thought of them and the sight of them make the tears of the saint flow. And this immense and intense compassion, which flows from the heart of the saints, makes them unable to bear the sight of the smallest, most insignificant wound in any creature. Thus they pray ceaselessly, with tears, even for animals, for enemies of the truth, and for those who do them wrong. " --Saint Isaac the Syrian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 16, 2003 Report Share Posted January 16, 2003 Hi Chris: > Aren't the Hunzas the ones we talked about earlier in the phytic acid thread > who eat most of their grain sprouted? Little or moderate amounts of phytic > acid in the diet I wouldn't expect to pose health problems, especially if the > majority of foods yielding the nutrients that the phytates bind up and > prepared properly. Phytic acid binds healthful and unhealthful metals, so if > the healthful ones are abundant enough in the diet small amounts of phytates > might actually be good. But if one consumes a large amount of grains, and > doesn't properly prepare any of them, one risks nutrien deficiencies. > ### I don't think I said " most " of their grains were sprouted, but rather that they ate lots of sprouts. (I'll have to look for my old post. . . Sorry if I used the wrong wording.) The bread the Hunza are said to have eaten were/are called chappati. Banik described them as " ubiquitous. " It appeared to be a regular main staple made of either wheat or millet, baked or deep-fried, and served with accompanying food. When the grain was harvested, it was ground in stone mills and stored for future use in containers similar to our round grain bins. I don't know how long they stored this. No mention of soaking. Tobe also wrote a book on the Hunza where he describes that they just mixed the bread with water and cooked it into flat breads. (I should check that book out from the library again to get the details.) Banik wrote that they soaked beans and peas in water for one or two days, and then spread the seeds out on wet cloths in the sun. They are eaten raw when they begin to sprout. He didn't mention wheat sprouts, although I realize that that doesn't mean they didn't sprout them too to eat raw. I'm not trying to convince you that you should eat wheat, but that I think certain things are being ignored about it. I think it's possible that wheat is being demonized more than it should be. Naturally, people who don't tolerate it should avoid it, but to say that we weren't designed to eat it period seems wrong to me. There is more to health than just what we eat (or not eat), how much we exercise, and the toxins in the environment. There's attitude as well that makes us sick. It has been documented that negative emotions (i.e. anger, greed, envy, etc.) also depress the immune system as well as stress. We have lost connection with the soil which is also healing to the body. You may have read about the healing properties of clay and sand, etc. Many civilized people don't even like to go out barefooted and spend too much time indoors. We pollute our minds with negative things every day. We tend to lean too much on one side. Life operates best in balance. Marla Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 16, 2003 Report Share Posted January 16, 2003 In a message dated 1/16/03 5:16:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, talithakumi@... writes: > As far as parasite concerns, yes, some areas are more problematic than > others. In that case, leather soled shoes conduct electricity and should be > okay. Rubber soled shoes insolate electricity and prevent grounding of the > body as do houses that are raised up above the ground. > Great! I'm currently making my first pair of shoes at Old Sturbridge Village, a living history museum I work at twice a month during school and full-time in the summer. If they're wearable when I finish them, I get to keep them! Do you have any suggestions for further reading on negative charges? Chris ____ " What can one say of a soul, of a heart, filled with compassion? It is a heart which burns with love for every creature: for human beings, birds, and animals, for serpents and for demons. The thought of them and the sight of them make the tears of the saint flow. And this immense and intense compassion, which flows from the heart of the saints, makes them unable to bear the sight of the smallest, most insignificant wound in any creature. Thus they pray ceaselessly, with tears, even for animals, for enemies of the truth, and for those who do them wrong. " --Saint Isaac the Syrian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 16, 2003 Report Share Posted January 16, 2003 --- In , Idol <Idol@c...> wrote: > Chris- > > >In short, I wonder how much biochemical individuality is the normal state of > >humanity and how much it is a disease state of modern civilization. > > This is exactly what I've been wondering for quite awhile now. I've long > suspected, for example, that people who " don't tolerate " animal foods > merely have digestive impairments that need to be repaired, not some > natural need to avoid animal foods. I'm sure there's some biochemical > individuality, but as you suggest, a lot of what we're seeing today is > undoubtedly biochemically individualized disease. > > And like you, I think the idea that people's fat consumption should range > from 10-30% of their caloric intake depending on their type is ludicrous. An example of this is my Grandmother, who barely digest fats at all. She grew up eating the wrong foods, and as a result her gallbladder became diseased and was removed (she does not subscribe to natural/primitive health practices or diets). In addition she has very serious liver problems and her bile ducts are clogged. Eating the wrong foods made it where she could no longer tolerate the good foods, like animal fat. It's a downward spiral... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 16, 2003 Report Share Posted January 16, 2003 According to the USDA there's almost 8 gm of fat and 11.5 gm of carbs per cup of plain whole milk yogurt. In this yogurt more calories would come from fat than carbs. I imagine that most of the calories in lowfat yogurt would come from carbs, but I didn't bother to check (I don't really care about the stats for lowfat yogurt) http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/cgi-bin/list_nut.pl > > > I have just bought MTD but have not read it yet. Look forward to it. I > wanted to comment on your trying yogurt before church. I always thought it > was a great diet choice but I read in my Jan/Feb Herbs for Health Mag. that > Yogurt is commonly used as a diet food, but is 70% carbohydrates. Although > yogurt is a great source of calcium, it has low protein and fat compared to > the amount of carbohydrates it contains. They say a good alternative is > cottage cheese. I don't have any at the moment to check its carb levels. I > suspect the egg and/or fat you are adding to the yogurt is helping more than > possibly the yogurt. Deborah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 16, 2003 Report Share Posted January 16, 2003 Hi Chris: > > Concerning going barefoot, what do you think are it's health benefits, and > what do you think of the concerns of some about parasite infections in the > foot? > (Considering the cleanliness of our asphault versus the ground in a > non-modernized less populated society). > ### The electrical charge of the earth is negative. When we touch the earth, the negative charge of the earth goes through our bodies. This is called grounding. Grounding protects us from bad effects of electromagnetic radiation. As far as parasite concerns, yes, some areas are more problematic than others. In that case, leather soled shoes conduct electricity and should be okay. Rubber soled shoes insolate electricity and prevent grounding of the body as do houses that are raised up above the ground. Marla Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.