Guest guest Posted August 16, 2004 Report Share Posted August 16, 2004 @@@@@@ Can anyone tell me whether you have used the NOW bone meal powder or the Solgar bone meal powder and what you thought of it? I need to find a calcium supplement and want to use bone meal powder. Does anyone have any opinions or experience with either of the brands (NOW and Solgar)? Any information would be appreciated. Rebekah @@@@@@@@ Just curious: Why do you need to find a calcium supplement? It's so easy to get from food and there's always the risk of making your Ca/Mg ratio too large... Mike SE Pennsylvania The best way to predict the future is to invent it. --Alan Kay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 16, 2004 Report Share Posted August 16, 2004 > bone meal powder > > > >Hello, > >Can anyone tell me whether you have used the NOW bone meal powder or the >Solgar bone meal powder and what you thought of it? I need to find a >calcium supplement and want to use bone meal powder. Does anyone have >any opinions or experience with either of the brands (NOW and Solgar)? >Any information would be appreciated. > >Rebekah Hi Rebekah, I don't know anything about those products, I use Dr. Ron's bone meal powder (from grass-fed NZ cattle) and think it's a good product. FWIW, I make a point not to buy solgar products as they are owned by Monsanto and I try not to give Monsanto my business. Suze Fisher Lapdog Design, Inc. Web Design & Development http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg Weston A. Price Foundation Chapter Leader, Mid Coast Maine http://www.westonaprice.org ---------------------------- " The diet-heart idea (the idea that saturated fats and cholesterol cause heart disease) is the greatest scientific deception of our times. " -- Mann, MD, former Professor of Medicine and Biochemistry at Vanderbilt University, Tennessee; heart disease researcher. The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics <http://www.thincs.org> ---------------------------- > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 16, 2004 Report Share Posted August 16, 2004 Suze Fisher wrote: > > > Hi Rebekah, > > I don't know anything about those products, I use Dr. Ron's bone meal > powder > (from grass-fed NZ cattle) and think it's a good product. FWIW, I make a > point not to buy solgar products as they are owned by Monsanto and I > try not > to give Monsanto my business. > > > Oh my! I didn't realize that about Solgar! Thanks for telling me. Does he sell an actual powder that you can mix into things or is it just a capsule? I tried looking at his website, but couldn't make out what the bone meal supplement actually had in it (it looks to be more than just bone meal) and what the daily dosage would be. It seemed kind of confusing. Anyway, how many capsules (or whatever form it is in) do you take a day? It seems kind of expensive. Rebekah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 16, 2004 Report Share Posted August 16, 2004 @@@ Rebekah: Well, it is a long story, but basically I have many, many factors that suggest both calcium absorption problems and lack of sufficient calcium in my diet. I had undiagnosed celiac most of my life, am very, very thin with very " small " bones, am nursing a baby and a 4 year old (occasionally), had two pregnancies only 3 years apart, etc. etc. Even though I raise dairy goats, I don't really eat that much dairy. Maybe 3 cups a day at the most, since I don't do well on plain milk. I also don't eat many leafy greens but do eat lots of meat. @@@@@@@@@ 3 cups of milk is about 1000mg of calcium, as much as anyone would typically need barring absorption problems. That's a ton of calcium. Certainly there must be ways of addressing root absorption issue. If you think it's best to get more (following the " dump more in at the same rate of absorption and get more " logic, which I don't know the validity of), then just add some (dried, fresh, or frozen) small fish to your diet, which is a super convenient and tasty way of eating bones that will supply a ton of calcium. You might want to focus more on getting more magnesium and trace minerals like boron, and possibly more vit D. I'd recommend eating sea veggies for the calcium hit and more importantly the trace minerals. I assume your comment about not doing well on plain milk means you don't make lactase and that you eat your milk as kefir or yogurt... You can always just eat more of these things since they can be prepared in so many ways... Sorry, I know all this is already old news to most folks here, but I figured it wouldn't hurt to comment... Mike SE Pennsylvania The best way to predict the future is to invent it. --Alan Kay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 16, 2004 Report Share Posted August 16, 2004 > Re: bone meal powder > >Oh my! I didn't realize that about Solgar! Thanks for telling me. >Does he sell an actual powder that you can mix into things or is it just >a capsule? I tried looking at his website, but couldn't make out what >the bone meal supplement actually had in it (it looks to be more than >just bone meal) and what the daily dosage would be. It seemed kind of >confusing. Anyway, how many capsules (or whatever form it is in) do you >take a day? It seems kind of expensive. > >Rebekah Hi Rebekah, Dr. Ron's bone meal comes in capsules. Here's the write-up on it: http://www.drrons.com/calcium_hydroxyapatite.html It IS expensive but often (not always), I think, you get what you pay for with supplements. VCO is more expensive than RBD CO for example. One thing I did notice when I started on the overall protocol from Dr. Ron is that my nails started growing long and strong after several months - previously they had been weak and always broke off before getting long. I had been drinking quite a bit of dairy before taking the bonemeal too. I don't know if the *type* of Ca in the bonemeal made a difference, or all the vit. D I started getting from CLO, or the two months I went off dairy and gluten - but *something* was having a clear effect on my nails. Also, my blood CA was slightly low before I started on the bonemeal. Having said that, my nails have gone back to being weak and short again and I'm still on the bonemeal. I had gone back on dairy and beer (essentially my only source of gluten) albeit I've been taking digestive enzymes specifically for casein and gluten intolerance, but my guess is that one or the other of these was/is responsible for my nail issues. So I can't credit the bonemeal for it. FWIW, I was taking 6 capsules/day when I was off dairy and now that I'm on dairy I'm taking 4 capsules/day. Suze Fisher Lapdog Design, Inc. Web Design & Development http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg Weston A. Price Foundation Chapter Leader, Mid Coast Maine http://www.westonaprice.org ---------------------------- “The diet-heart idea (the idea that saturated fats and cholesterol cause heart disease) is the greatest scientific deception of our times.” -- Mann, MD, former Professor of Medicine and Biochemistry at Vanderbilt University, Tennessee; heart disease researcher. The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics <http://www.thincs.org> ---------------------------- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 16, 2004 Report Share Posted August 16, 2004 Rebekah Fechner- wrote: > By the way, has anyone found a way > to actually eat the bones of the large animals like cows, besides making > bone broths? How about making your own bone meal by grinding the bones? Roman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 16, 2004 Report Share Posted August 16, 2004 Adelle in her old book Let's Cook it Right says that meat bones can be a very rich source of Ca. She suggests a 24-48 hour soak in water with vinegar as opposed to NT 1 hours soak. Then long simmered like NT says.She says " add as much acid when preparing these meats as you can without making them unpalatable " Accordng to a single serving of a dish soaked and simmered for a long time can supply the equivalent Ca of 3 qts of milk. I sure would like to see the orginal source of this info. Let's Cook it Right was orginally written in 1947 so I'm guessing somewhere there is a research paper on this. Maybe someone who has access to a nutrional library could find it. Lynn > > > By the way, has anyone found a way > > to actually eat the bones of the large animals like cows, besides making > > bone broths? > > How about making your own bone meal by grinding the bones? > > Roman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 16, 2004 Report Share Posted August 16, 2004 > > > I don't know anything about those products, I use Dr. Ron's bone meal powder (from grass-fed NZ cattle) and think it's a good product. FWIW, I make a point not to buy solgar products as they are owned by Monsanto and I try not to give Monsanto my business. > Suze, I'm glad to know this about Solgar! I never bought any of their products. They had a bad vibe, somehow! How did you find out about that? Hi Rebekah, I use Jarrow Formulas 'Calcium Magnesium Plus.' The source of Jarrow's MCHC is Australian pasture-fed, free range livestock. Here is what Dr. Ron had to say about this when I posted a question about MCHC to him: Me: I would like to know more about the advantage that MCHC has over other forms of calcium on the market. I'm currently taking the Jarrow product (Calcium Magnesium Plus), which contains Ossein MCHC. I would happily take your supplement, but I'm in Canada, so with the exchange rate, etc. the price is rather prohibitive. Dr. Ron: MCHC is extremely well absorbed, as is calcium citrate; those two are the best-absorbed forms of calcium supplement. MCHC is in the form of a cold-processed bone matrix, and the calcium is only 28% of the MCHC (microcrystalline hydroxyapatite complex); the rest is associated proteins and other substances that naturally occur in the bone. It's like eating a little bone broth, but raw. I believe the Jarrow product you are using is very good. Yarrow's product might not be as expensive as Dr. Ron's, and perhaps you can find it in stores. ~ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 16, 2004 Report Share Posted August 16, 2004 > Re: bone meal powder > > > >> >> >> I don't know anything about those products, I use Dr. Ron's bone >meal powder (from grass-fed NZ cattle) and think it's a good product. >FWIW, I make a point not to buy solgar products as they are owned by >Monsanto and I try not to give Monsanto my business. >> > >Suze, I'm glad to know this about Solgar! I never bought any of their >products. They had a bad vibe, somehow! How did you find out about that? I don't remember - it was a year or two ago. I think it was posted to one of the lists and I think I verified it by googling. That's to the best of my recollection. Suze Fisher Lapdog Design, Inc. Web Design & Development http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg Weston A. Price Foundation Chapter Leader, Mid Coast Maine http://www.westonaprice.org ---------------------------- “The diet-heart idea (the idea that saturated fats and cholesterol cause heart disease) is the greatest scientific deception of our times.” -- Mann, MD, former Professor of Medicine and Biochemistry at Vanderbilt University, Tennessee; heart disease researcher. The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics <http://www.thincs.org> ---------------------------- > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2004 Report Share Posted August 17, 2004 >Well, it is a long story, but basically I have many, many factors that >suggest both calcium absorption problems and lack of sufficient calcium >in my diet. I had undiagnosed celiac most of my life, am very, very >thin with very " small " bones, am nursing a baby and a 4 year old >(occasionally), had two pregnancies only 3 years apart, etc. etc. Rebekah: FWIW, I take calcium supplements for the same reason. I think taking bone meal is a lot better though, I'll probably switch to that (or make some from fermented bones, which would be better). I get tetany when I don't take supplements, even when I'm eating lots of good stuff, which has convinced me I just don't absorb it well, even after 2 years GF and getting lots of good sunshine. Heidi Jean Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2004 Report Share Posted August 17, 2004 Roman wrote: > How about making your own bone meal by grinding the bones? > What would I use to grind the bones? I have tried breaking apart raw bone before, and it is hard. I don't know that I have the equipment to do that. Rebekah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2004 Report Share Posted August 17, 2004 Following previously posted to list. Solgar not here. Other well known brands with Monsanto and the like corporations behind them are. Wanita When you buy the following organic brands, you are putting money into pockets of corporations that you might not want to profit from your purchase: Organic and Natural Product Companies Associated with Monsanto Brand Name(s): Arrowhead Mills, Bearitos, Breadshop, Celestial Seasonings, Earth's Best Baby Food, Garden of Eatin, Health Valley, Imagine Foods, Terra Chips, Westbrae, Millina's, Mountain Sun, Shari Ann's, Walnut Acres Owned By: Hain Food Group Principle Stockholders: Bank of America, Entergy Nuclear, ExxonMobil, H.J. Heinz, Lockheed , Merck, Monsanto, Pfizer, Philip , Walmart, Waste Mangement Inc. Significantly Owned By: Citigroup Brand Name(s): Cascadian Farms, Muir Glen Owned By: Small Planet Foods Principle Stockholders: General Mills Significantly Owned By: Alcoa, Chevron, Disney, Dupont, ExxonMobil, General Electric, Mcs, Monsanto, Nike, Pepsico, Pfizer, Philip , Starbucks, Target, Texas Instruments Got the info from http://organicconsumers.org <http://organicconsumers.org/> (go to Millions against Monsanto link) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2004 Report Share Posted August 17, 2004 >>>Well, let me put it a different way.... I think the calcium from bone meal would be better for me personally and more easily absorbed for me than the calcium from dairy or leafy greens. I know how I work and how my digestion works, and I am definitely not a veggie, dairy person. I do well on meat and sometimes that is the only thing I feel I can easily digest. The logical conclusion I draw from this is that I should be eating the bones of these meat animals. I bet way back when, before dairy was around, people did eat bones somehow or maybe just the marrow.<<< Did you see the recent thread about egg-shell calcium: /message/52990 " ...XXX, your mother could also make her own calcium citrate if she wanted:-) She would place several clean fresh uncooked whole-eggs-in- shell in a glass jar and cover with fresh squeezed lemon juice. Refrigerate for several days -- checking daily. You want to whisk the eggs out while you can, if left too long and every bit of shell has been transformed, it can be hard to get the whole-egg-in- membrane out without breaking. Then just take a spoonful of calcium citrate a day as her calcium source, stirring beforehand... " Cheers, Tas'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2004 Report Share Posted August 17, 2004 > Re: bone meal powder > > >Following previously posted to list. Solgar not here. Other well known >brands with Monsanto and the like corporations behind them are. Solgar's not organic. Suze Fisher Lapdog Design, Inc. Web Design & Development http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg Weston A. Price Foundation Chapter Leader, Mid Coast Maine http://www.westonaprice.org ---------------------------- “The diet-heart idea (the idea that saturated fats and cholesterol cause heart disease) is the greatest scientific deception of our times.” -- Mann, MD, former Professor of Medicine and Biochemistry at Vanderbilt University, Tennessee; heart disease researcher. The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics <http://www.thincs.org> ---------------------------- > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2004 Report Share Posted August 17, 2004 May I have permission to cross-post. Solgar was just mentioned on another list that I use and I suggested they might like to consider that it's a Monsanto company. Cheers, Tas'. Re: bone meal powder Following previously posted to list. Solgar not here. Other well known brands with Monsanto and the like corporations behind them are. Wanita When you buy the following organic brands, you are putting money into pockets of corporations that you might not want to profit from your purchase: Organic and Natural Product Companies Associated with Monsanto Brand Name(s): Arrowhead Mills, Bearitos, Breadshop, Celestial Seasonings, Earth's Best Baby Food, Garden of Eatin, Health Valley, Imagine Foods, Terra Chips, Westbrae, Millina's, Mountain Sun, Shari Ann's, Walnut Acres Owned By: Hain Food Group Principle Stockholders: Bank of America, Entergy Nuclear, ExxonMobil, H.J. Heinz, Lockheed , Merck, Monsanto, Pfizer, Philip , Walmart, Waste Mangement Inc. Significantly Owned By: Citigroup Brand Name(s): Cascadian Farms, Muir Glen Owned By: Small Planet Foods Principle Stockholders: General Mills Significantly Owned By: Alcoa, Chevron, Disney, Dupont, ExxonMobil, General Electric, Mcs, Monsanto, Nike, Pepsico, Pfizer, Philip , Starbucks, Target, Texas Instruments Got the info from http://organicconsumers.org <http://organicconsumers.org/> (go to Millions against Monsanto link) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2004 Report Share Posted August 17, 2004 > Re: bone meal powder > > >Did you see the recent thread about egg-shell calcium: > > /message/52990 > > " ...XXX, your mother could also make her own calcium citrate if she >wanted:-) She would place several clean fresh uncooked whole-eggs-in- >shell in a glass jar and cover with fresh squeezed lemon juice. >Refrigerate for several days -- checking daily. You want to whisk the >eggs out while you can, if left too long and every bit of >shell has been transformed, it can be hard to get the whole-egg-in- >membrane out without breaking. Then just take a spoonful of calcium >citrate a day as her calcium source, stirring beforehand... " Eggshell calcium is carbonate, not citrate, FWIW. (Unless the acidic medium changes the Ca type). Suze Fisher Lapdog Design, Inc. Web Design & Development http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg Weston A. Price Foundation Chapter Leader, Mid Coast Maine http://www.westonaprice.org ---------------------------- " The diet-heart idea (the idea that saturated fats and cholesterol cause heart disease) is the greatest scientific deception of our times. " -- Mann, MD, former Professor of Medicine and Biochemistry at Vanderbilt University, Tennessee; heart disease researcher. The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics <http://www.thincs.org> ---------------------------- > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2004 Report Share Posted August 17, 2004 > Re: bone meal powder >> >> >>Following previously posted to list. Solgar not here. Other well known >>brands with Monsanto and the like corporations behind them are. > > >Solgar's not organic. Even though it's not, apparently the Organic Consumer's Association has mentioned that they have been taken over by Monsanto: http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache:v9vO7iRNWa0J:www.organicconsumers.org/g e/britact699.cfm+Monsanto+Solgar & hl=en " The American health-product company SOLGAR has been taken over by MONSANTO. Solgar vitamins are sold widely in the UK. " Suze Fisher Lapdog Design, Inc. Web Design & Development http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg Weston A. Price Foundation Chapter Leader, Mid Coast Maine http://www.westonaprice.org ---------------------------- “The diet-heart idea (the idea that saturated fats and cholesterol cause heart disease) is the greatest scientific deception of our times.” -- Mann, MD, former Professor of Medicine and Biochemistry at Vanderbilt University, Tennessee; heart disease researcher. The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics <http://www.thincs.org> ---------------------------- > > >Suze Fisher >Lapdog Design, Inc. >Web Design & Development >http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg >Weston A. Price Foundation Chapter Leader, Mid Coast Maine >http://www.westonaprice.org > >---------------------------- >“The diet-heart idea (the idea that saturated fats and cholesterol cause >heart disease) is the greatest scientific deception of our times.” -- >Mann, MD, former Professor of Medicine and Biochemistry at Vanderbilt >University, Tennessee; heart disease researcher. > >The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics ><http://www.thincs.org> >---------------------------- > > >> > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2004 Report Share Posted August 17, 2004 @@@ Rebekah: The logical conclusion I draw from this is that I should be > eating the bones of these meat animals. I bet way back when, before > dairy was around, people did eat bones somehow or maybe just the marrow. @@@@ Nature (including human physiology) doesn't know anything about human logic. Most things in nature are ad hoc and messy, not logical. While people have little choice but to base their dietary choices on their first-hand physiological experiences, it's an entirely different and misguided approach to base them on logic or intuition. That kind of approach could be used to suggest we should eat egg shells or potato leaves or something... I don't think there's any doubt people have been eating marrow as a staple for most of human history, but from the limited data I've been able to find (only for moose marrow if I recall correctly), it's counterintuitively a pretty poor source of calcium. Bearded seal intestine is apparently a better source of calcium. I suspect that in in those past times there were several other things going on. One is they might've just needed less calcium because their mineral intake was balanced in terms of the ratios between different minerals (Mg, Zn, Fe, K, Na, etc) and their absorption was good. It's easy to forget that the body only needs and absorbs a tiny fraction of the minerals we consume, and if someone's usage of calcium was 5 times more efficient than another's, then they need 5 times less, which could be a pretty small amount. There are those studies of African tribes who have a perfect calcium balance with a very low calcium intake (less than 500mg), and of course the intake levels currently recommended by experts and/or preferred through trial-and-error (e.g. Heidi's experience) reflect the extremely compromised condition of current diets and physiologies. Another factor is that people were more active, hence requiring more calories, eating more food, and getting enough calcium and other minerals even if their sources were not especially dense. A final point is one that Heidi has often made, that it's likely people ate a lot of small animals (not just fish, but land animals) with small enough bones to run through the digestive system. So they might've been eating bones, but not necessarily from big game. We've discussed the bone meal recipes of the Sudanese on this list in the past but that's a relatively sophisticated technology that I'd hesitate to attribute to earlier eras of humans. (I can't recall if me or someone else ever posted those passages from Dirar's book, and I'd do it now but I've long since returned the book to the library. A quick scan of my files doesn't show that I have that info electronically.) In my files I found NN message 43610, which you could use to backtrack to someone who posted about eating soft bones after making stock. That's a promising angle for someone in your situation I think, some extension of the stock process along the lines of that poster and the Sudanese. @@@ > I do eat as much canned wild salmon as I can stand (which isn't alot). > I don't really have good sources for quality fish of any kind. I don't > trust the labels on the packages at the asian food stores either. They > seem to contain hidden ingredients many times. @@@ I agree about the Asian labels, but for simple dried and frozen fish, there couldn't be much in the way of hidden ingredients besides unreported salt. I know me, Heidi, and others use dried anchovies and the like pretty regularly with much success and no suspicion of problematic ingredients. I used some frozen small fish to make a totally improvised coconut fish curry recently for some guests, and with astonishment and great enthusiasm they ate the pot clean and said it was the best curry they'd ever had; the flavor was decidedly not fishy at all because it was subdued by the complex blend of other flavors and the fish themselves were not very strong. (I can't remember what kind they were, but they were about 4 inches long I think.) I only mention this because even though I love fishy flavors, I know a lot of people don't. @@@ > I have read about the trace mineral issues and do have sea veggies that > I eat occassionally, but the taste is quickly overpowering, and I > honestly don't know that I am at this point a sea veggie digesting kind > of person. @@@ If you use a small amount in soups the flavor is backgrounded and the naturally occurring free glutamate contributes a strong umami flavor that enhances the flavors of the other ingredients. It's very easy to use them that way and avoid an overpowering flavor. Additionally, long cooking of the sea veggies breaks down some of the long-chain sugars that are hard to digest for humans. In terms of minerals, a little sea flora goes a long way. I never make a soup without a little. Mike SE Pennsylvania The best way to predict the future is to invent it. --Alan Kay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2004 Report Share Posted August 17, 2004 Canned sardines and salmon have small, soft, cooked bones in with the meat. Some people pick them out (not easy!) but most just mash it up and eat them together. I feed them to my dogs this way, although I don't care for either myself. Christie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2004 Report Share Posted August 17, 2004 >Eggshell calcium is carbonate, not citrate, FWIW. (Unless the acidic medium >changes the Ca type). > > >Suze Fisher Right. Mixing calcium carbonate with citric acid gives calcium citrate, which is easier to absorb. If you mix it with vinegar you get calcium acetate. Heidi Jean Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2004 Report Share Posted August 17, 2004 >I suspect that in in those past times there were several other things >going on. One is they might've just needed less calcium because their >mineral intake was balanced in terms of the ratios between different >minerals (Mg, Zn, Fe, K, Na, etc) and their absorption was good. Early humans ate a fair amount of small bones and fur ... I was surprised how MUCH of that sort of thing the average carnivore eats until I saw some coyote scat, then watched my cat eat a baby rabbit. >It's easy to forget that the body only needs and absorbs a tiny >fraction of the minerals we consume, and if someone's usage of calcium >was 5 times more efficient than another's, then they need 5 times >less, which could be a pretty small amount. There are those studies >of African tribes who have a perfect calcium balance with a very low >calcium intake (less than 500mg), and of course the intake levels >currently recommended by experts and/or preferred through >trial-and-error (e.g. Heidi's experience) reflect the extremely >compromised condition of current diets and physiologies. Yep ... my experience is that anyone with gluten issues has VERY odd calcium usage. In general celiacs *deposit* calcium as bone spurs, kidney stones, or brain calcifications at the same time they are deficient in it. It's like it won't stay in the bloodstream, it keeps solidifying out. I don't know the reason for this ... might be Vit D ... but it's probably an underlying source for the whole calcium issue. My last steer has these incredibly strong bones, tho he never got supplements and ate only grass, and he was a large, older animal. I don't think the calcium *intake* is the main problematic factor. >A final point is one that Heidi has often made, that it's likely >people ate a lot of small animals (not just fish, but land animals) >with small enough bones to run through the digestive system. So they >might've been eating bones, but not necessarily from big game. Most of the big game though, had " marks " on the bone from being chewed or scraped. They ate fur and feathers too (I don't know the calcium content of those...) I still think whole small fish are the most nutrient dense food you can get, and don't forget bugs! Which are a universal food. >I agree about the Asian labels, but for simple dried and frozen fish, >there couldn't be much in the way of hidden ingredients besides >unreported salt. I know me, Heidi, and others use dried anchovies >and the like pretty regularly with much success and no suspicion of >problematic ingredients. I used some frozen small fish to make a >totally improvised coconut fish curry recently for some guests, and >with astonishment and great enthusiasm they ate the pot clean and said >it was the best curry they'd ever had; the flavor was decidedly not >fishy at all because it was subdued by the complex blend of other >flavors and the fish themselves were not very strong. (I can't >remember what kind they were, but they were about 4 inches long I >think.) I only mention this because even though I love fishy >flavors, I know a lot of people don't. I agree. Anchovies, pulverized and added to food, add the " umami " taste but don't taste " fishy " ... same for other dried fish. Canned anchovies are salty and fishy, but even they are ok if added to a sauce (like worcestershire sauce ...). > Heidi Jean Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2004 Report Share Posted August 17, 2004 >>>Yep ... my experience is that anyone with gluten issues has VERY odd calcium usage. In general celiacs *deposit* calcium as bone spurs, kidney stones, or brain calcifications at the same time they are deficient in it. It's like it won't stay in the bloodstream, it keeps solidifying out.<<< Does this still happen if the person is avoiding gluten? Cheers, Tas'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2004 Report Share Posted August 17, 2004 >>>>Yep ... my experience is that anyone with gluten issues has VERY >odd calcium usage. In general celiacs *deposit* calcium as bone >spurs, kidney stones, or brain calcifications at the same time they >are deficient in it. It's like it won't stay in the bloodstream, it keeps >solidifying out.<<< > > >Does this still happen if the person is avoiding gluten? > >Cheers, >Tas'. I hope not! I still think I don't process calcium right (see previous posts). But as for brain calcifications, which tend to cause seizures, they seem to stop forming on a GF diet. Gallstones seem to clear up too (based on anectdotal evidence I've heard, there may be a study on it somewhere). Migraines are calcium-usage disorders of some sort (the calcium channels get disrupted, but the when I read about it, they weren't sure exactly what the disruption was, but taking extra calcium seems to help migraine sufferers) ... and I haven't had a migraine since February, so I'm probably doing something right. Migraines are very much associated with gluten intolerance, and dairy (casein) intolerance so I think both might disrupt calcium usage somehow. Heidi Jean Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2004 Report Share Posted August 17, 2004 Tas, Don't see why not. Has URL included. Originally posted here by April Myers. Wanita > May I have permission to cross-post. Solgar was just mentioned on another list that I use and I suggested they might like to consider that it's a Monsanto company. > > Cheers, > Tas'. > > Re: bone meal powder > > > Following previously posted to list. Solgar not here. Other well known > brands with Monsanto and the like corporations behind them are. > > Wanita > > When you buy the following organic brands, you are putting money into > pockets of corporations that you might not want to profit from your > purchase: > Organic and Natural Product Companies > Associated with Monsanto > Brand Name(s): Arrowhead Mills, Bearitos, Breadshop, Celestial > Seasonings, Earth's Best Baby Food, Garden of Eatin, Health Valley, > Imagine Foods, Terra Chips, Westbrae, Millina's, Mountain Sun, Shari > Ann's, Walnut Acres Owned By: Hain Food Group Principle Stockholders: > Bank of America, Entergy Nuclear, ExxonMobil, H.J. Heinz, Lockheed > , Merck, Monsanto, Pfizer, Philip , Walmart, Waste Mangement > Inc. Significantly Owned By: Citigroup > Brand Name(s): Cascadian Farms, Muir Glen Owned By: Small Planet Foods > Principle Stockholders: General Mills Significantly Owned By: Alcoa, > Chevron, Disney, Dupont, ExxonMobil, General Electric, Mcs, > Monsanto, Nike, Pepsico, Pfizer, Philip , Starbucks, Target, Texas > Instruments > Got the info from http://organicconsumers.org > <http://organicconsumers.org/> (go to Millions against Monsanto link) > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2004 Report Share Posted August 21, 2004 @@@ Mike/Rebekah: > Nature (including human physiology) doesn't know anything about human > logic. Most things in nature are ad hoc and messy, not logical. > While people have little choice but to base their dietary choices on > their first-hand physiological experiences, it's an entirely different > and misguided approach to base them on logic or intuition. That kind > of approach could be used to suggest we should eat egg shells or > potato leaves or something... Ummm, look, I know about nature enough to know that I *can* base my dietary and other decisions on intuition. I really don't appreciate being called " misguided " either. This whole above paragraph sounds really condescending to me. @@@@@@ I agree it's really condescending, but I don't see a problem with that. That's a valid and convenient style of discourse that reflects my great confidence in the viewpoint I was expressing. I don't think anybody appreciates having something they do called " misguided " , but obviously everyone is misguided at numerous points in life and it's not surprising that other people will sometimes notice and remark on this! Also, it's your choice whether you personalize this disagreement. My advice would be not to take it personally. It's just a difference in theoretical viewpoints. @@@ Rebekah: Also, I don't think logic and intuition are similar at all and shouldn't be lumped together. @@@@ Well, this shows that my point was not understand at all, because in the context of my point the differences between logic and intuition are irrelevant. Further, in general, they are extremely similar systems. While both terms are certainly vague, it's fair to say that logic is little more than intuition with a few more details filled in, and, conversely, that intuition is little more than vague logic. (Note that in this context I'm obviously referring to " logic " as the category of human cognition, not the other meaning of a formal mathematical system.) They are both general classes of belief-generation activity in human central nervous systems, their differences only reflecting the wide range of specificity in knowledge representation that is suitable for useful manipulation by human central systems. They are not, for example, things that go on in our pancreas or arms, or things that go on in plants or solar systems, and they have nothing whatsoever to do with the meat or bones of animals. My point about basing things on logic or intuition could've been stated more perspicuously, though, because obviously we do successfully use logic and intuition to make dietary decisions! It's more precisely the imputation of logical and intuitive properties to our bodies and our foods (two classes of objects very different than central nervous systems) that is misguided. It might be possible to restate the distinction in terms of using logic + knowledge versus using logic alone. The distinction is slippery, so some concrete examples are called for. Here's an example of using logic successfully. Bob knows, courtesy of the work of thousands of scientists, that food is primarily composed of fat, protein, and carbohydrates. Obviously this knowledge came into being with the help of logic as a tool, but it has content that has nothing whatsoever to do with logic. He also knows, courtesy of thousands of scientists, that certain parts of certain animals, like the soft red stuff and the soft white and yellow stuff, contains large amounts of fat. He also knows, again courtesy of thousands of scientists, that humans require large amounts of fat in their diet. Notice that this knowledge can be viewed as an extrapolation of knowledge based on first-hand physiological experiences, demonstrating that such knowledge is a good basis for making dietary decisions. Armed with all this knowledge, Bob uses logic to conclude that he should eat some of those animal parts that contain fat. Here's an example of using logic unsuccessfully. Hank knows that food is primarily composed of fat, protein, and carbohydrates. Hank knows that humans require large amounts of fat in their diet. Hank knows that fat is often soft and mushy. Hank is an Eskimo and all this knowledge comes from scientific work done by Eskimos in an Eskimo environment. This community has no knowledge of large tropical fruits. Hank moves to the tropics and finds mangos and papayas. Hank learns that these fruits are soft and mushy. Hank uses logic to conclude that these foods are extremely high in fat and that he should eat lots of them to replace all the fat he's used to eating. (He might also have an intuition that all the different places on earth will have their own environment-specific lodes of edible fat for humans and that these fruits must be the tropical counterpart to all the blubber he used to eat, reinforcing his decision.) Here's another example of using logic unsuccessfully. Jane knows that fruits have been eaten by humans for a long time. Jane knows that fruits are the only food that has evolved to be eaten. (Naturally we can dispute this point, but it's at least plausible for this to be part of the state of knowledge in Jane's knowledge community.) Jane knows that fruits can be easily and copiously eaten without any tools or preparation. Jane uses logic to conclude that fruits are the ideal food for humans and that will be healthiest if she eats them exclusively. Here's another example of using logic unsuccessfully. Rebekah knows that bones are an excellent source of calcium. She knows that humans require large amounts of calcium in their diet. She knows that veggies and dairy are also excellent sources of calcium, but she has a negative experience eating these foods. She has a positive experience eating the flesh of animals. She uses logic to conclude that the bones of these animals are a better source of calcium for her. I'm not suggesting there's anything unwise at all about eating bones! Taking all the practical situational factors into account, it's probably one of the better options for you. While I find your overall reasoning very sensible, I'm simply pointing out a major flaw in part of it, that's there's any relevance of your body's use of one part of an animal to your body's use of another part of the same animal. That's no better than Hank's reasoning. Here's the original post I was responding to for reference: @@@ Rebekah: Well, let me put it a different way.... I think the calcium from bone meal would be better for me personally and more easily absorbed for me than the calcium from dairy or leafy greens. I know how I work and how my digestion works, and I am definitely not a veggie, dairy person. I do well on meat and sometimes that is the only thing I feel I can easily digest. The logical conclusion I draw from this is that I should be eating the bones of these meat animals. I bet way back when, before dairy was around, people did eat bones somehow or maybe just the marrow. @@@@@@@@@ @@@ Rebekah: I actually feel that I am in tune with nature to a satisfactory degree, having given birth unassisted, completely tuned in to " nature " , god and the life force. I know that is something that you will never experience, unless science somehow comes up with a " miracle " of some sort. Learning to trust one's body in pregnancy and birth is one major step along the way to health and empowerment, IMO, and gives a woman a completely new outlook on life and the needs of her body. I feel that our bodies are very intelligent and do indeed know what we need and attempt to let us know. @@@@@@ I admire your experiences, and all these things sound wonderful, but have nothing at all to do with the original topic, which was the validity of making decisions based on a perception of logic in nature. The comment that our bodies are intelligent and that we can tune into them echoes my statement that people base decisions on their first-hand physiological experiences. As you described it, your logical conclusion that you should be eating bones has nothing whatsoever to do with bodily experience. @@@ Rebekah: Perhaps if you were in my shoes for a while you would understand my POV. @@@@@@ I imagine that's true of everyone and everything! Mike SE Pennsylvania 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.