Guest guest Posted January 17, 2005 Report Share Posted January 17, 2005 >>>Dr. Bernstein (http://www.diabetes-normalsugars.com) believes 90 should be the limit fasting or otherwise and he uses five insulin shots a day to do this, he is seventy, has had diabetes type1 for 58 of those years and has no diabetic complications. We start producing insulin at about 85 upwards so that's when the body gets worried. but at what point we should get worried I don't know. One doctor in bernsteins forums reckons above 90 is when the heart starts to come under extra pressure and above 105 is when the kidneys get over-taxed. The okinawan example is not so good in some ways as only 34 okinawans out of every 100,000 reach a hundred years of age, not impressive as it stands, only impressive if compared to other societies. That makes me think the high carb okinawa way is probably not the best answer, but I obviously don't know what the answer is. Thanks, but one mans personal example and his thoughts and the messages on his internet forum is not really relevant. There are many people doing many different things to extend life, most without any scientific (or logical) basis. Base on large studies, and lots of evidence, we know fasting glucose should be uner 100 and as I mentioned, 90 may be better. >>>So for 10,000 of us following a 10% cr okinawa diet (that's if they were doing 10%) we can expect just 4 of us to reach age 100, it seems like a big gamble, unless we argue that most okinawans were not eating a good diet and that only the centarians were, in which case our chances are better. Now, you are not really going to take the word of Dr Bernstein over the Okinawan data? How is the thoughts/examples of one, better than that of all the data on the okinawans and the rural chinese and japanese? Talk about a big gamble!!! Whatever the numbers are, the okinawans have more per capita centarians than anywhere else in the world. So, maybe not THE best, but the best we have right now. A new book that just came out based on years of research is the China Study from T Colin which is a great read. You might want to check it out. Regards Jeff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2005 Report Share Posted January 17, 2005 >>For what its worth I think that Pritkin and Ornish would beat those okinawa statistics hands down if a similar group could be studied over time. But how well they would beat them I don't know. I am sure there must be a better way to raise that 34 to a much higher level. We are actually in the process of going back over the records for the last 30 or so years and try to see what we can about those who have stayed with, and why, those who havent and why, and how well everyone has done. Its easy to study them while we have them here, but following them, once they leave is harder. We do have 2 5 yr follow up studies, which showed great follow up, but we want to see what we kind find over the longer term. When we get the info, I wil be glad to share it here and we will also look to publish it. It may take the rest of this year to collect, sort and analyse it all. Regards Jeff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2005 Report Share Posted January 17, 2005 The China Study, T. Colin : " Some findings from the 1983 survey The dietary patterns in China are strikingly different from Western countries, the major difference being the consumption of foods of animal origin. Animal protein intake, for example, is 10-fold greater, on average, in the US. than in China. Although the biology of the diet and disease relationship is infinitely complex and is easily misunderstood when interpreted in a reductionism manner, the main nutritional conclusion from this study is the finding that the greater the consumption of a variety of good quality plant-based foods, the lower the risk of those diseases which are commonly found in western countries (eg., cancers, cardiovascular diseases, diabetes). Based on these and other data, we hypothesize that 80-90% of all such diseases could be prevented before about age 90 years. The optimum lifetime blood cholesterol concentration may be as low as 100-125 mg/dL (compared to an average concentration of about 210 mg/dL in the US.). The same dietary factors which increase blood cholesterol concentrations among Americans (at the much higher ranges) also increase cholesterol at the lower concentrations of the Chinese; these include, for example, increased intakes of dietary fat and animal protein and decreased intakes of dietary fiber and legumes. Moreover, the lower the blood cholesterol, the lower the risk for various cancers; there is no evidence of a cholesterol threshold below which further decreases in disease would not occur. These two facts are quite remarkable, in that they suggest that almost any consumption of animal-based foods (higher in fat, lower in fiber) may increase blood cholesterol (among many other biochemical changes) from a very low level, this to be followed by a significant increase in the prevalence of the degenerative diseases (many other analyses of these same data for individual diet-disease relationships support this interpretation). Chinese consume more total calories (per unit of body weight), yet have far less obesity than AMericans, probably accounted for both by greater physical activity and greater consumption of a low fat, plant-based diet. chronic infection with hepatitis B virus is a major cause of primary liver cancer. Together with the highly significant nutritional findings, this cancer appears to be a viral/nutritional disease, not a viral/chemical carcinogen disease as previously thought (our data on this question are more comprehensive than all others combined, thus our conclusion on the role of nutrition, even though different, is highly relevant). Control of the prevalence of this disease may be best achieved through immunization of young children. Prevention of disease progression among individuals who suffer chronic hepatitis infection may be best achieved through strict adherence to a low fat, plant based diet. Consumption of salt-preserved ( " pickled') vegetables increases stomach cancer while consumption of fresh vegetables decreases this cancer. Provided there is adequate dietary variety and quantity of plant-based foods and an otherwise good public health environment, achievement of adult height can be maximized without consuming animal-based foods. Breast cancer, low in China, nonetheless is greater with the consumption of the typical Western diet (high in animal- based foods and fat, and low in plant-based foods) which encourages body growth rates to be too rapid, and sexual maturation to occur too early. " On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 13:24:36 -0500, Jeff Novick <jnovick@...> wrote: > > > >>>Dr. Bernstein (http://www.diabetes-normalsugars.com) believes 90 > should be the limit fasting or otherwise and he uses five insulin shots > a day to do this, he is seventy, has had diabetes type1 for 58 of those > years and has no diabetic complications. We start producing insulin at > about 85 upwards so that's when the body gets worried. but at what > point we should get worried I don't know. One doctor in bernsteins > forums reckons above 90 is when the heart starts to come under extra > pressure and above 105 is when the kidneys get over-taxed. The okinawan > example is not so good in some ways as only 34 okinawans out of every > 100,000 reach a hundred years of age, not impressive as it stands, only > impressive if compared to other societies. That makes me think the high > carb okinawa way is probably not the best answer, but I obviously don't > know what the answer is. > > Thanks, but one mans personal example and his thoughts and the messages > on his internet forum is not really relevant. There are many people > doing many different things to extend life, most without any scientific > (or logical) basis. > > Base on large studies, and lots of evidence, we know fasting glucose > should be uner 100 and as I mentioned, 90 may be better. > > >>>So for 10,000 of us following a 10% cr okinawa diet (that's if they > were doing 10%) we can expect just 4 of us to reach age 100, it seems > like a big gamble, unless we argue that most okinawans were not eating a > good diet and that only the centarians were, in which case our chances > are better. > > Now, you are not really going to take the word of Dr Bernstein over the > Okinawan data? How is the thoughts/examples of one, better than that of > all the data on the okinawans and the rural chinese and japanese? Talk > about a big gamble!!! > > Whatever the numbers are, the okinawans have more per capita centarians > than anywhere else in the world. So, maybe not THE best, but the best > we have right now. > > A new book that just came out based on years of research is the China > Study from T Colin which is a great read. > > You might want to check it out. > > Regards > Jeff > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2005 Report Share Posted January 17, 2005 >>> The China Study, T. Colin : " Some findings from the 1983 survey This is his new book that just came out... http://tinyurl.com/5dcgb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 18, 2005 Report Share Posted January 18, 2005 IMHO it's folly to ignore the OKIE data. Besides being the best we have as to what humans should eat and how they should be living to attain old age, they attain it INTACT and VITAL and HEALTHY. Good enough for me, at least til something better comes along. The rest is just conjecture. The OKIES are a proven method. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 18, 2005 Report Share Posted January 18, 2005 Not just to be contrary but ... The Okie data is a proven method for Okies. We may have different genes, different environment (perhaps causing different gene expression), etc... We don't have a very complete picture of human nutrition so can't have perfect knowledge. That said the Okie data is compelling and some of the best we have, but true folly IMO is assuming we know. JR -----Original Message----- From: fskelton@... [mailto:fskelton@...] Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 9:50 AM Subject: Re: [ ] Re: Best Foods IMHO it's folly to ignore the OKIE data. Besides being the best we have as to what humans should eat and how they should be living to attain old age, they attain it INTACT and VITAL and HEALTHY. Good enough for me, at least til something better comes along. The rest is just conjecture. The OKIES are a proven method. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 19, 2005 Report Share Posted January 19, 2005 Might have been a lot higher without effect of WWII. ----- Original Message ----- From: rwalkerad1970 Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 12:53 PM Subject: [ ] Re: Best Foods When I re-read my e-mail it only just sank in how poor the okinawa statistics look and as no other figures (china study etc) are better, then this is all we have - a 34 in 10,000 chance of reaching a hundred the okinawa way. For what its worth I think that Pritkin and Ornish would beat those okinawa statistics hands down if a similar group could be studied over time. But how well they would beat them I don't know. I am sure there must be a better way to raise that 34 to a much higher level.richard .... 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.