Re: strict diet weigh less, have strong bones, other benefits

[Guest guest]

Hi Apricot:

I really do not understand that article. It says that they

have " many of the signs of strong bones " . But then it says they have

low bone mass and doesn't mention any indication I can see that their

bones are strong. So what are these " many signs " ? Do I need to get

a better pair of reading glasses?

If there is a way to secure reduced fracture risk with low BMI it is

something we could all benefit from.

[The use of the term " BUT " in the phrase " thin but healthy " is funny

for anyone around here.]

Rodney.

--- In , apricot85 <apricot85@a...>

wrote:

> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7317449/ [was it really just about the

> sunshine???]

> Raw food vegans thin but healthy, study finds

> WASHINGTON - People who adhere strictly to raw food vegetarian

diets are

> thin but have surprisingly robust bones, U.S. researchers reported

on

> Monday.

>

> Although nutritionists and the food industry have warned that a

diet

> without dairy foods can lead to the bone-thinning disease

osteoporosis,

> the team at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis

found

> the vegans they studied had many of the signs of strong bones.

>

> We think its possible these people dont have increased risk of

> fracture but that their low bone mass is related to the fact that

they

> are lighter because they take in fewer calories, Dr. Luigi

Fontana, who

> led the study, said in a statement.

>

> Raw food vegetarians believe in eating only plant-derived foods

that

> have not been cooked, processed, or otherwise altered from their

natural

> state, Fontanas team wrote in this weeks issue of the Archives

of

> Internal medicine.

>

> Low BMI and body fat content

> Because of their low calorie and low protein intake, raw food

> vegetarians have a low body mass index (BMI) and a low total body

fat

> content. It is well documented that a low BMI and weight loss are

> strongly associated with low bone mass and increased fracture risk,

> while obesity protects against osteoporosis.

>

> Fontanas team studied 18 strict raw food vegans aged 33 to 85. All

ate

> a diet that included unprepared foods such vegetables, fruits,

nuts, and

> sprouted grains. They had been on this diet for an average of 3.6

years.

>

> The team compared them to 18 more average Americans. The raw food

group

> had an average body mass index of 20.5, while the average group

were

> slightly overweight with a BMI of 25.

>

> BMI is an internationally accepted measurement of height to weight,

and

> a BMI of 18.5 to 24 is considered the healthy range.

>

> Higher levels of vitamin D

> Fontana expected the vegans to have low vitamin D levels because

they

> avoid all animal products including dairy. But in fact their

vitamin D

> levels were markedly higher than average.

>

> Vitamin D is made by the skin when the body is exposed to sunlight

and

> is key to keeping strong bones. It is added to milk and other foods

> because it is so important.

>

> These people are clever enough to expose themselves to sunlight to

> increase their concentrations of vitamin D, Fontana said.

>

> And the vegans had low levels of C-reactive protein, an

inflammatory

> molecule that is becoming linked with the risk of heart disease,

> diabetes and other chronic disease.

>

> Furthermore, they had lower levels of IGF-1, a growth factor linked

to

> risk of breast and prostate cancer.

>

> Fontana does not advocate a raw food diet. But he said that to

lower the

> risk of cancer and heart disease people should eat more fruits,

> vegetables and whole grains.

[Guest guest]

It says participants have high D levels, low C-reactive protein, low

IGF-1. The article seems to infer that it's the D level that indicates

strong bones (definitely a variable), and the other two markers are

indicative of other health factors. That's the best I can make of the

article, which may be off base. Another likely possibility is that the

article isn't capturing all relavant info that out group would want to

know. I don't think it's your reading glasses... I don't see the

" many " signs of strong bones either.

Rodney wrote:

> I really do not understand that article. It says that they

> have " many of the signs of strong bones " . But then it says they have

> low bone mass and doesn't mention any indication I can see that their

> bones are strong. So what are these " many signs " ? Do I need to get

> a better pair of reading glasses?

>

> If there is a way to secure reduced fracture risk with low BMI it is

> something we could all benefit from.

>

> [The use of the term " BUT " in the phrase " thin but healthy " is funny

> for anyone around here.]

>

>

>

> > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7317449/ [was it really just about the

> > sunshine???]

> >

[Guest guest]

I dont think they actually measured bone density but just are inferring it.

Jeff

[Guest guest]

Hi Apricot and other good folks:

I just purloined a copy of the full text of the study. (Many thanks

to the supplier)

***** ABSOLUTELY PRICELESS *****

My BMD data are very nearly identical to those of the raw foodists in

the study.

QUESTION: So how much of my 'problem' is purely a function of having

a politically incorrect BMI? (I.E. according to DXA software, if

your aren't obese you aren't healthy).

ANSWER: Most of it I think. LOL

Rodney.

We are gonna have to refer to this study as " WUSTL II " .

> > > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7317449/ [was it really just about

the

> > > sunshine???]

> > >