Mcs

[Guest guest]

Heard on this week's business news that MickeyDee had a blowout fourth

quarter (end of '04) - sales stronger than ever.

Apropos of this, I recently took an airline trip. I like to look around the

food court areas and see what people are eating and which food lines are

longest. The hamburger/fries meals are as popular as ever, as were all the

other junk/fast food lines. It's as if people never heard of the topics we

discuss here. Hard to believe that this isn't the usual pattern of eating

since there were healthier alternatives available.

I shared a booth with a business traveler who was eating a Chicago pizza and

she at least did take off much of the cheese on her pizza - but a companion

promptly ate all the leftover cheese that she discarded.

I had no trouble buying salads or fruit smoothies. Short lines.

[Guest guest]

We are surely in some tiny monority of the population who actually evaluate

nutrition and energy content of food, considering the

consequences of eating it before the fact.

This is why things like food labeling, and even that stupid food pyramid are

important to apply whatever subtle influence on the

general population to stop them harming themselves. It appears to work if just

adding trans-fats to labels can drive several food

companies to avoid them. Then they advertise that they don't use them, further

raising the awareness that transfers may be bad.

I hope we (the Gov't) have the wisdom to steer the cattle to a better result

than their unbridled taste buds. I'm not so sure about

that in the wild, but with the huge distortions caused by abundance and

engineering of processed foods, combined with modern

technological labor savings, it appears we need to try to help. Or all pay the

price to support health care of a sicker and sicker

population.

JR

Yes I own MCD stock, no I don't eat there, but thanks for the report.:-)

-----Original Message-----

From: Francesca Skelton [mailto:fskelton@...]

Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2005 12:48 PM

support group

Subject: [ ] Mcs

Heard on this week's business news that MickeyDee had a blowout fourth

quarter (end of '04) - sales stronger than ever.

Apropos of this, I recently took an airline trip. I like to look around the

food court areas and see what people are eating and which food lines are

longest. The hamburger/fries meals are as popular as ever, as were all the

other junk/fast food lines. It's as if people never heard of the topics we

discuss here. Hard to believe that this isn't the usual pattern of eating

since there were healthier alternatives available.

I shared a booth with a business traveler who was eating a Chicago pizza and

she at least did take off much of the cheese on her pizza - but a companion

promptly ate all the leftover cheese that she discarded.

I had no trouble buying salads or fruit smoothies. Short lines.

[Guest guest]

Hi :

On a slightly different tack, my GP tells me that in her experience

no one can be persuaded to change ANYTHING about their lifestyle in

the interests of improving their health. Put a little differently:

they care so little about their health they are prepared to change

nothing.

Given they care so little about their health, I cannot imagine why

they would expect anyone else to care about their health if they

don't. The problem is that one way or another WE are paying for

THEIR health costs, either through insurance premiums or taxes.

LOL it makes me feel a bit better about getting my money's worth this

week!

Rodney.

--- In , " kayellr " <karenlruss@y...>

wrote:

>

> This is very frustrating. As an example of how this can be

> perpetuated in even the well meaning I offer the following story.

>

> One of my coworkers is severely overweight (probably 150 lbs or more

> overweight). She has recently had a long bout of health problems

> because of weight (age 35) including surgery and culminating a month

> ago in a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes among other problems. She is

> under strict doctor orders to get weight under control, and she is

> struggling to do so with the standard " portion control " . Another

> coworker is a nutritionist, who gives nutrition information to the

> public as part of her job.

>

> The nutritionist brought in a special " low calorie, healthy " treat

for

> many of us in the office to sample last week, especially the

coworker

> with diabetes. Her goal was largely to show her how to change her

> diet. Thank heavens I was left out - " I know you're watching

> calories, but I didn't offer it since you're vegetarian " Whew

>

> The low cal treat. Spaghetti squash lasagne - except that

EVERYTHING

> except the spaghetti squash looked packed full of saturated fat -

> greasy looking ground beef, wads of yellow cheese. Ick.

>

> Later I asked nutritionist why she didn't bring something else as an

> example. She said that most people can't and won't change their

diet

> in the ways I have, that " IT'S TOO EXTREME " so you have to show them

> how to make little changes, gradually. Yet she never talked to our

cw

> about more veg, less fat, anything, never gave her the oppurtunity

to

> CHOOSE for herself from REAL INFORMATION, at what is probably the

most

> motivated time of her life. She just ASSUMED that the changes would

> be too extreme to bear.

>

> And none of them seem to notice that my 300 to 350 calorie lunch

> almost fills a grocery sack to overflowing. Or when they do, it's

> jokes about how I'm possibly going to eat it all. The connection

> between my being very comfortably full and not having eaten a pile

of

> garbage and calories escapes them all.

>

> GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR! /rant

[Guest guest]

The really sad thing is that I think my diabetic coworker IS

motivated. She has made a number of changes and has lost some weight

already, but it is a horrible struggle for her. Her doctor and the

" nutritionist " both talk to her mostly about portion control and

avoiding carbs, rather than in concrete terms of what she can change,

how to get better nutrition. The result of her eating the tiny

portions of the regular SAD diet is that of course she is getting low

nutrients, she is ravenously hungry all the time, and now of course

her weight loss is slowing as her metabolism slows down.

I have talked to her some about how I eat and how to stay full on low

calories while getting everything you need. I've talked to her about

using FitDay to make sure she is getting her nutrients. I've loaned

her copies of Eat To Live and Volumetrics, but the experts are telling

her to just control the amount of her current diet, and make some

relatively minor changes in her refined carbs.

But of course, they are the experts.

Just remembered - the last helpful thing the nutritionist did last

week was print out the new dietary guidelines for her (all 80 pages)

and say, just follow these, you'll be fine.

>

> Hi :

>

> On a slightly different tack, my GP tells me that in her experience

> no one can be persuaded to change ANYTHING about their lifestyle in

> the interests of improving their health. Put a little differently:

> they care so little about their health they are prepared to change

> nothing.

>

> Given they care so little about their health, I cannot imagine why

> they would expect anyone else to care about their health if they

> don't. The problem is that one way or another WE are paying for

> THEIR health costs, either through insurance premiums or taxes.

>

> LOL it makes me feel a bit better about getting my money's worth this

> week!

>

> Rodney.

[Guest guest]

As a nutritionist, I can tell you that most of the work done by my profession,

and my colleagues and in the name of " nutrition " and " healthy eating " is an

embarrassment.

The problem runs so deep, there is not any easy answer. Its beyond what they

teach, what they are taught, who certifies them, who sponsors the funding for

their programs, etc etc.

My favorite line I ever heard in reagrds to nutritionists was one day when I was

with a friend and we overheard one person recommending to another person that

they should go see a dietitian, and my friend said, " why, so they can tell you

what's the best color jello to eat? " .

I remember when I had first gone back to school, there was a front page story on

some new government sponsored nutrition program in the community and there was a

picture of 2 grossly obese women sitting at a kitchen table with some samples of

food between them. The caption read " Nutritionist Kathy M helping community

member Sharon B learn about healthy eating. " I thought to myself " what is

wrong with this picture!!! " .

I am on several professional (?) nutrition lists, and the quality of the

conversation and analysis that goes on here is at a much higher level than most

of what transpires on that of the professionals (and why I enjoy this list).

In regard to the comments about the person with diabetes trying to eat better

and Mcs serving " healthier " items. ...

This IS the problem. Look at what is going on at both ends.

At one end, we have well meaning people who are trying to learn to do better

and really want to do better and they have no where to turn. On the other

end, we have companies like Mcs spending Billions to advertise their new

products as " healthy " when in fact, eat the salad with the cheese, croutons and

regular dressing and you would have done better eating the big mac. Same with

the food labels. They are an atrocity and not getting any better.

Every week I teach a class on understanding food marketing and labels and ask a

class of about 50-75 how many of them try to read the food labels. 85-100% of

them all raise their hands. When I ask how many understand all the numbers and

their significance/meaning to their health and in deciding if a product is

healthy or not, at most, maybe 1-3%. And, than they usually find out that even

they were being misled on some level.

In regard to coconut, if anyone hasn't seen it yet, the Coconut Diet has hit the

shelves last week and is basing its claim on the fact that MCTs, are metabolized

slightly different that LCTs, yielding slightly less calories per gram. Yes,

there is truth in that, but in no way will that solve the obesity epidemic and

has other health concerns.

Also, you got companies like Whole Foods (Frauds) saying they have voluntarily

removed all hydrogenated and trans fat from their products and wont sell any

product that contains any. So, I went to the store and checked, specifically,

all the products that used to have hydrogenated fats. Yup, they are right, the

hydrogenated fats are gone. Now, they are all full of Palm Oil, Palm Kernel

Oil, Coconut Oil and Butter. The hydrogenated are gone and they replaced them

with tropical and saturated fats. Oh, did I mention that they are all

organic? And to be even more deceptive, as some people try to avoid the

tropical oils, they are not listing it as Palm Oil, it now says Palm Fruit Oil,

or Oil of the Palm Fruit, or Natural Oil (From The Palm Fruit).

Many of the products I checked contained on average almost 50% of their fat as

saturated fat. So half of the fat in these products is now saturated instead of

hydrogenated. Many of the products I checked contained on average 25-33% of

their total calories as saturated fats.

The also play another trick. Instead of listing Palm Oil as Palm Oil, they now

list it as a natural oil or natural blend of oil and than in parenthesis it says

Palm Fruit. Some products say Palm Fruit Oil. Here is what the manufacturer of

one of the products said at their website about this product...

Comparisons to Other Tropical Oils: Palm Kernel oil is 83% saturated fat;

Coconut Oil is 92% saturated; Palm Fruit Oil is only 51% saturated fat and

contains no cholesterol.

Butter: Butter is 54% saturated and contains high levels of cholesterol.

Partially Hydrogenated Soybean Oil: Although Palm Fruit Oil has more saturated

fat than partially hydrogenated oil, it contains no trans-fatty acids.

They also do the trick where they are replacing the hydrogenated fats with DGs

and MGs, which are not regulated. And, when the replace Hydrogenated fats, it

sure makes me wonder if the DGs and MGs are also hydrogenated.

Are we in a Woody movie?

Regards

Jeff

PS " In an insane society, it is the same members, who appear to be insane. "

[Guest guest]

The reasons I've heard are:

Pffffh!

You'll only extend the last years of your life.

Take enough vitamins cures anything.

My grandmother was 86 and 225# when she died.

As long as I can get around that's all I want.

I'm not too heavy - I'm too short.

As long as I don't have to give up my beer.

I've got a hormone problem (500#er). I saw him later at Red lobster shucking down 3 plates of all-you-can-eat popeye shrimp. He's that guy the kept a bag of cheetos at his desk - turned his keyboard orange.

I'm not fat - I'm German.

My doctor tried to get me to lose weight and I told him I'd get another doctor.

My answers have been:

Do the bars have help for people in wheelchairs (strokes).

My 43yo doctor died of liver cancer, right after he rec'd 400 iu Vit e and 500 mg vit c.

Your grandmother rolled down the stairs.

Well you look like your getting a round well. (pun)

Aren't you afraid those new toilets (hung from the wall) will collapse?

Didn't you tell me your brakes keep wearing out on the left side?

I bet he was relieved. He tells that to all his patients he thinks will die soon. He has the best record of any doctor around here.

My doctor was so excited when I told her I had lost 50 #, she put me through all kinds of tests to find out what was wrong. She didn't believe anyone could lose weight.

Regards.

----- Original Message -----

From: Rodney

Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2005 3:20 PM

Subject: [ ] Re: Mcs

Hi :On a slightly different tack, my GP tells me that in her experience no one can be persuaded to change ANYTHING about their lifestyle in the interests of improving their health. Put a little differently: they care so little about their health they are prepared to change nothing.Given they care so little about their health, I cannot imagine why they would expect anyone else to care about their health if they don't. The problem is that one way or another WE are paying for THEIR health costs, either through insurance premiums or taxes.LOL it makes me feel a bit better about getting my money's worth this week! Rodney.

[Guest guest]

Well, Jeff, I can tell you the most important thing to notice about a dietician, nutritionist, aerobic dance leader, or anyone connected with the medical profession is THEIR weight. If a nurse weighs more than me, I don't want to look at her much less listen.

The fat people need "anti-nutritionists".

I live in a fat county. We have more fat people - no morbidly obese people - than anywhere I've been. I once saw a woman so large I wanted to ask HOW she got there in the food market. Like how did she get in the back of a truck? How'd she get thru the door (that was before walmart). She was so fat, I left quickly because I thought she might be contagious.

The nice thing about Big Mac is they don't have double doors.

And the food labels are often grossly in error as to sodium content. Easily proved if you look at the thick bacon versus the thin and it's the same content per strip. They use the same label. And it's not right anyway. The only safe way to eat bacon is soak it overnight in distilled water, before cooking.

The ONLY food that has less sodium in the can than captured is a raw oyster. Now why the hxxx is that? Salmon has so much sodium, I have to soak it before I give it to the cat. (Well not the neighbor's cat).

So I'm trying frozen Pollock. Not quite as greasy as salmon. Main reasons are it's here, it's cheap, and it's not soaked in salt. Microwave, squeeze some lemon, a little red pepper, close your eyes, and it's like flounder (close your eyes hard).

Regards.

----- Original Message -----

From: Jeff Novick

Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2005 6:01 PM

Subject: [ ] Re: Mcs

As a nutritionist, I can tell you that most of the work done by my profession, and my colleagues and in the name of "nutrition" and "healthy eating" is an embarrassment. The problem runs so deep, there is not any easy answer. Its beyond what they teach, what they are taught, who certifies them, who sponsors the funding for their programs, etc etc.My favorite line I ever heard in reagrds to nutritionists was one day when I was with a friend and we overheard one person recommending to another person that they should go see a dietitian, and my friend said, "why, so they can tell you what's the best color jello to eat?".I remember when I had first gone back to school, there was a front page story on some new government sponsored nutrition program in the community and there was a picture of 2 grossly obese women sitting at a kitchen table with some samples of food between them. The caption read "Nutritionist Kathy M helping community member Sharon B learn about healthy eating." I thought to myself "what is wrong with this picture!!!".I am on several professional (?) nutrition lists, and the quality of the conversation and analysis that goes on here is at a much higher level than most of what transpires on that of the professionals (and why I enjoy this list).In regard to the comments about the person with diabetes trying to eat better and Mcs serving "healthier" items. ...This IS the problem. Look at what is going on at both ends. At one end, we have well meaning people who are trying to learn to do better and really want to do better and they have no where to turn. On the other end, we have companies like Mcs spending Billions to advertise their new products as "healthy" when in fact, eat the salad with the cheese, croutons and regular dressing and you would have done better eating the big mac. Same with the food labels. They are an atrocity and not getting any better.Every week I teach a class on understanding food marketing and labels and ask a class of about 50-75 how many of them try to read the food labels. 85-100% of them all raise their hands. When I ask how many understand all the numbers and their significance/meaning to their health and in deciding if a product is healthy or not, at most, maybe 1-3%. And, than they usually find out that even they were being misled on some level. In regard to coconut, if anyone hasn't seen it yet, the Coconut Diet has hit the shelves last week and is basing its claim on the fact that MCTs, are metabolized slightly different that LCTs, yielding slightly less calories per gram. Yes, there is truth in that, but in no way will that solve the obesity epidemic and has other health concerns. Also, you got companies like Whole Foods (Frauds) saying they have voluntarily removed all hydrogenated and trans fat from their products and wont sell any product that contains any. So, I went to the store and checked, specifically, all the products that used to have hydrogenated fats. Yup, they are right, the hydrogenated fats are gone. Now, they are all full of Palm Oil, Palm Kernel Oil, Coconut Oil and Butter. The hydrogenated are gone and they replaced them with tropical and saturated fats. Oh, did I mention that they are all organic? And to be even more deceptive, as some people try to avoid the tropical oils, they are not listing it as Palm Oil, it now says Palm Fruit Oil, or Oil of the Palm Fruit, or Natural Oil (From The Palm Fruit). Many of the products I checked contained on average almost 50% of their fat as saturated fat. So half of the fat in these products is now saturated instead of hydrogenated. Many of the products I checked contained on average 25-33% of their total calories as saturated fats.The also play another trick. Instead of listing Palm Oil as Palm Oil, they now list it as a natural oil or natural blend of oil and than in parenthesis it says Palm Fruit. Some products say Palm Fruit Oil. Here is what the manufacturer of one of the products said at their website about this product...Comparisons to Other Tropical Oils: Palm Kernel oil is 83% saturated fat; Coconut Oil is 92% saturated; Palm Fruit Oil is only 51% saturated fat and contains no cholesterol. Butter: Butter is 54% saturated and contains high levels of cholesterol. Partially Hydrogenated Soybean Oil: Although Palm Fruit Oil has more saturated fat than partially hydrogenated oil, it contains no trans-fatty acids. They also do the trick where they are replacing the hydrogenated fats with DGs and MGs, which are not regulated. And, when the replace Hydrogenated fats, it sure makes me wonder if the DGs and MGs are also hydrogenated.Are we in a Woody movie?RegardsJeff PS "In an insane society, it is the same members, who appear to be insane."

[Guest guest]

This is just what we are talking about.

They are now going to put the " plant sterols " that are in products like Benecol

and Cholest-Off, in fried snack foodsor fry them in oil that has the pant

sterols in the oil

http://tinyurl.com/5rw7u

Additive May Help Chips Lower Cholesterol

Sun Jan 30, 7:42 PM ET

<http://us.rd./dailynews/addtomy/*http://add.my./content?id=61\

90 & .src=yn & .done=http%3a//news./news%3ftmpl=story%26cid=534%26e=1%26u=/\

ap/20050131/ap_on_he_me/fit_cholesterol_fighting_chips> Health - AP

<http://us.rd./dailynews/addtomy/*http://add.my./content?id=61\

90 & .src=yn & .done=http%3a//news./news%3ftmpl=story%26cid=534%26e=1%26u=/\

ap/20050131/ap_on_he_me/fit_cholesterol_fighting_chips>

By MARK JEWELL, AP Business Writer

WALTHAM, Mass. - Tortilla chips might not be health food anytime soon, but

science may have found a way to make them lower your cholesterol. Researchers

are frying chips in oil spiked with an ingredient from plants called

phytosterol, which can soak up cholesterol without harming the taste.

[Guest guest]

Thanks for the link.

There articles are so inaccurately stated it drives me nuts (after years of reading and writing engineering specs).

But what it touts is that sterols, which btw, are high in corn oil versus soy oil versus others, reduce LDL. That doesn't pass my laff test.

It may be the greatest idea in the world, but you have to consider is the use of the oil - do they know how long the oil will be used - how much sterol is in there and how much is lost in the first frying or cooked off the first day? I have to think these "designers" are literally stupid. Oil is too expensive to throw away after the first use. And it's expensive to discard (pollution).

Regards.

----- Original Message -----

From: Jeff Novick

Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2005 11:05 PM

Subject: RE: [ ] Re: Mcs

This is just what we are talking about.They are now going to put the "plant sterols" that are in products like Benecol and Cholest-Off, in fried snack foodsor fry them in oil that has the pant sterols in the oilhttp://tinyurl.com/5rw7uAdditive May Help Chips Lower {SERUM} Cholesterol Sun Jan 30, 7:42 PM ET<http://us.rd./dailynews/addtomy/*http://add.my./content?id=6190 & .src=yn & .done=http%3a//news./news%3ftmpl=story%26cid=534%26e=1%26u=/ap/20050131/ap_on_he_me/fit_cholesterol_fighting_chips> Health - AP <http://us.rd./dailynews/addtomy/*http://add.my./content?id=6190 & .src=yn & .done=http%3a//news./news%3ftmpl=story%26cid=534%26e=1%26u=/ap/20050131/ap_on_he_me/fit_cholesterol_fighting_chips> By MARK JEWELL, AP Business Writer WALTHAM, Mass. - Tortilla chips might not be health food anytime soon, but science may have found a way to make them lower your {SERUM?} cholesterol. Researchers are frying chips in oil spiked with an ingredient from plants called phytosterol, which can soak up? {HOW - WHICH CHOLE? How about reduce LDL in 3 months,eg?} cholesterol without harming the taste.

[Guest guest]

http://molecular.biosciences.wsu.edu/Faculty/pall/pall_mcs.htm

Multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS), where people

report being exquisitely sensitive to a wide range of

organic chemicals, is almost always described as being

" controversial. " The main source of this supposed

controversy is that there has been no plausible

physiological mechanism for MCS and consequently, it

was difficult to interpret the puzzling reported

features of this condition. As discussed below, this

is no longer true and consequently the main source of

such controversy has been laid to rest. There still

are important issues such as how it should be

diagnosed and treated and these may also be allayed by

further studies of the mechanism discussed below.

The descriptions of MCS made by a several different

research groups are remarkably consistent. MCS

sufferers report being hypersensitive to a wide

variety of hydrophobic organic solvents, including

gasoline vapor, perfume, diesel or jet engine exhaust,

new or remodeled buildings where building materials or

carpeting has outgassed various solvents, vapors

associated with copy machines, many solvents used in

industrial settings, cleaning materials and cigarette

and other smoke. Each of these is known to have

volatile hydrophobic organic compounds as a prominent

part of its composition. The symptoms of MCS sufferers

report having on such solvent exposure include

multiorgan pain typically including headache, muscle

pain and joint pain, dizziness, cognitive dysfunction

including confusion, lack of memory, and lack of

concentration. These symptoms are often accompanied by

some of a wide range of more variable symptoms. The

major symptoms reported on chemical exposure in MCS

are strikingly similar to the chronic symptoms in

chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) and may be explained by

mechanisms previously proposed for the CFS symptoms

(1). Perhaps the best source of information on the

properties and science of MCS is the Ashford and

book (2). Many individual accounts of MCS

victims have been presented in an interesting book

edited by (3). Most MCS sufferers trace their

sensitivity to chemicals to a chemical exposure at a

particular time in their life, often a single, high

level exposure to organic solvents or to certain

pesticides, notably organophosphates or carbamates.

Some MCS cases are traced to a time period where the

person lived or worked in a particular new or newly

remodeled building ( " sick building syndrome " ) where

the outgassing of the organic solvents may have had a

role in inducing MCS. One of the most interesting

examples of MCS/sick building syndrome occured about

15 years ago when the U. S. Environmental Protection

Agency remodeled its headquarters and some 200 of its

employees became chemically sensitive. The obvious

interpretation of this pattern of incidence of MCS is

that pesticide or high level or repeated organic

solvent exposure induces cases of MCS. This

interpretation has been challenged by MCS skeptics but

they have, in my judgement, no plausible alternative

explanation.

MCS in the U. S. appears to be surprisingly common.

Epidemiologists have studied how commonly MCS occurs

in the U. S. and roughly 9 to 16 % having more modest

sensitivity. Thus we are talking about perhaps 10

million severe MCS sufferers and perhaps 25 to 45

million people with more modest sensitivity. From

these numbers, it appears that MCS is the most common

of what are described as " unexplained illnesses " in

the U. S. Those suffering from severe MCS often have

their lives disrupted by their illness. They often

have to move to a different location, often undergoing

several moves before finding an tolerable environment.

They may have to leave their place of employment, so

many are unemployed. Going out in public may expose

them to perfumes that make them ill. They often report

sensitivity to cleaning agents used in motels or other

commercial locations. Flying is difficult due to jet

fumes, cleaning materials, pesticide use and perfumes.

The exquisite sensitivity of many MCS people is most

clearly seen through their reported sensitivity to

perfumes. MCS people report becoming ill when a person

wearing perfumes walks by or when they are seated

several seats away from someone wearing perfume.

Clearly the perfume wearer is exposed to a much higher

dose than is the MCS person and yet the perfume wearer

reports no obvious illness. This strongly suggests

that MCS people must be at least 100 times more

sensitive than are normal individuals and perhaps a

1000 or more times more sensitive.

__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

Duehring, co-founder of the Chemical Injury Information Network

suddenly changed the focus of her investigation to mycotoxins very

shortly before her death.

She was on the right track, but didn't make the breakthrough to " The

Mycotoxin Connection " in time.

I was fortunate enough to do so and was able to abate the MCS

reactions, and have been disbelieved by MCSers ever since, because

their paradigm is that this illness cannot be addressed.

The role of Anaphylatoxins as primary initiators of inflammatory

response is being clarified by Dr Shoemaker.

I highly recommend that MCSers obtain " Mold Warriors " and start the

journey up the learning curve.

-

[Guest guest]

--- In , " erik_johnson_96140 " <erikj6@e...>

wrote:

Unfortunately all too many of us that have MCS know it came from an

exposure from mold. Can't tell you how much it s_cks having systematic

fungal disease, mcs, chronic fatigue, and the fibro.

[Guest guest]

> Unfortunately all too many of us that have MCS know it came from

an

> exposure from mold. Can't tell you how much it s_cks having

systematic fungal disease, mcs, chronic fatigue, and the fibro.

Yes, you don't have to tell me, been there and done it.

I told the story on this list of contacting one of the examples of

MCS in Dr Rosenbaums book " Solving the puzzle of CFS " and

sayiing that I disagree with the theory presented in the book that

the MCS was due to multiple chemical assaults and that the

triggering effects are all of equal consideration.

I told the guy that it sounded to me like his family's illness was

induced by toxic mold instead and he almost screamed at me over the

phone " THAT'S WHAT I TOLD DR ROSENBAUM BUT HE CHANGED MY STORY TO

FIT HIS THEORY " .

I was thoroughly amazed to find that I could exert almost total

control over MCS and being a " Universal Reactor " (as diagnosed by Dr

) by mycotoxin avoidance alone.

By accompanying other Incline Village CFSers into sick buildings I

found that they had the indentical response, but other than

, few people diagnosed with CFS are interested in undertaking

an avoidance protocol directed at mycotoxins specifically.

I can't say as I blame them - it's a real pain.

But at least I got to spend the last seven years mountain climbing

and controlling CFS instead of allowing it to control me.

For me, it was well worth it, for others - perhaps not.

-

[Guest guest]

....

How can you explain the statement that MCS have to investigate mold

warriors.....Can you with any degree of certainity that mold is the

underlying cause even with those who have NEVER had any mold related

situations?

Please incluse citations/references for such statements...

TIA

On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, erik_johnson_96140 wrote:

> Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 15:28:39 -0000

> From: erik_johnson_96140 <erikj6@...>

> Reply-

>

> Subject: [] Re: MCS

>

>

> Duehring, co-founder of the Chemical Injury Information Network

> suddenly changed the focus of her investigation to mycotoxins very

> shortly before her death.

> She was on the right track, but didn't make the breakthrough to " The

> Mycotoxin Connection " in time.

> I was fortunate enough to do so and was able to abate the MCS

> reactions, and have been disbelieved by MCSers ever since, because

> their paradigm is that this illness cannot be addressed.

> The role of Anaphylatoxins as primary initiators of inflammatory

> response is being clarified by Dr Shoemaker.

> I highly recommend that MCSers obtain " Mold Warriors " and start the

> journey up the learning curve.

> -

>

>

>

>

>

>

> FAIR USE NOTICE:

>

>

>

>

>

________________________________________________________________________________

>

[Guest guest]

Angel MCS < wrote:

> ....

> How can you explain the statement that MCS have to investigate mold

warriors.....Can you with any degree of certainity that mold is the

underlying cause even with those who have NEVER had any mold related

situations?

>

Angel,

Oh, I didn't say " have to " .

I only recommended it.

When everyone told me that there was no way out, I found one - and

this is it.

And I'm not the only one...

If people don't feel that this warrants their interest, I recommend

that they do whatever they feel is appropriate.

-