Guest guest Posted October 5, 2002 Report Share Posted October 5, 2002 At the risk of waxing philosophical.. CRON is a journey not a destination... one person's health food is another's junk. As long as you are making positive incremental changes to your diet you are moving in the right direction. Total cereal is far better that Count Chockula or cheerios but not as good as getting those same nutrients from natural foods. Depending upon where you are, if Total is an improvement go for it, if it's not, don't.... Another suggestion, don't be in a hurry. If CRON works you'll be sitting around with none of your old friends to talk to for years, so take your time and focus on small incremental improvements... just as long as every change is for the better, there will be plenty of time... JR -----Original Message-----From: somejoanne2002 [mailto:bhsnz@...]Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 9:29 PM Subject: [ ] Breakfast cereal> > Interesting that you eat Total. We have an extensive thread on that> subject. Well since the old Total cereal subject has come up again - it is interesting to note what Walford himself writes on breakfast cereals. From page 265-266 of BT120YD: He recommends Grape Nuts as the most naturally nutritious of the processed cereals if one chooses to eat processed cereals. Graps Nuts is then followed by others such as Cherios, Shreaded Wheat etc. He then, based on a Consumer Reports study, raises questions about the bioavailability of the vitamins in cereals. So that is probably where the debate over that issue originated. The most interesting point of all in this section is where he recommends grains in general and soy as containing inositol "which by reacting with copper and iron ions prevent the later from participating in reactions producting the distructive hydroxly radicals". And makes the point that thus grains "contain several phytonutrients not present in fruits and vegetables". Although what the others are even the footnote didn't say.My oh so humble opinion: Well ... first of all I quite like breakfast cereal - and I choose low sugar varieties - but maybe I like it more than I should. The supplimentation in cereal is quite useful if you are not taking a basic multi-vitamin suppliment (or megameals or contstant DWIDP analysis) because even a seemly very nutritious diet may be low in certain nutrients. And the risk of this is greater IMO than the risk of the miniscule bit of sugar a low-sugar cereal contains. However a multivitamin and some whole grains seems far healthier - obviously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 5, 2002 Report Share Posted October 5, 2002 > [...] since the old Total cereal subject has come up again - > it is interesting to note what Walford himself writes on breakfast > cereals. From page 265-266 of BT120YD: > He recommends Grape Nuts as the most naturally nutritious of > the processed cereals if one chooses to eat processed cereals. Many cereals don't do too well on: " Acrylamide in Heat-Processed Foods " http://www.danmahony.com/acrylamidechart.htm 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.