RE: Re: Nourishing Traditions by Sally Fallon

[Guest guest]

What are GM mice? Are the Okinawans (who do not eat " unnatural " foods and

who are not in a lab) mentioned and discussed at all?

on 8/14/2003 5:44 PM, paultheo2000 at paultheo2000@... wrote:

> Well, I've been doing a lot of thinking and I'm no longer sure about

> anything. It seems that ~insulin~ is the common denominator, not

> calories consumed. The tests on mice and monkeys are done with

> unnatural foods and experiments with GM mice have shown insulin to be

> the key determinant of health.

>

> So I'm not sure anymore. CR does work, but perhaps only because it's

> cutting carbs. I don't know what to think currently. I'd be pretty

> happy if calorie restriction wasn't necessary though.

>

> -

>

>

>>

>>> Hi guys,

>>>

>>> I just finished 'Nourishing Traditions' by Sally Fallon and it was one

>>> of the best books I've ever read. I've found some of the information

>>> quite shocking but I've completely changed my mind about several

>>> things. It goes against all orthodoxy and even what I think most CRON

>>> members would advocate. The first 70 pages and last 10 are nutritional

>>> information and practical tips. I'm going to let my family read it: it

>>> has great motivational information against trans fat and sugar (but I

>> Why butter is actually very healthy as well

>>> as coconut oil and palm kernel oil as well as high fat milk and

>>> non-lean animal problems.

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Inuit (traditionally) live off extremely few carbs, as do other groups, and

they still die at the regular age... They evidently avoided diabetes, heart

disease and stroke well enough, but there was not life-extension as is

glimpsed with the Okinawans (or lab rats).

Apart from the reduction of calories, no maximum life-span extending process

has been developed as related to diet, regardless of macro-nutrient profile.

Cheers,

> -----Original Message-----

> From: paultheo2000 [mailto:paultheo2000@...]

> Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 3:45 PM

>

> Subject: [ ] Re: Nourishing Traditions by Sally Fallon

>

>

> Well, I've been doing a lot of thinking and I'm no longer sure about

> anything. It seems that ~insulin~ is the common denominator, not

> calories consumed. The tests on mice and monkeys are done with

> unnatural foods and experiments with GM mice have shown insulin to be

> the key determinant of health.

>

> So I'm not sure anymore. CR does work, but perhaps only because it's

> cutting carbs. I don't know what to think currently. I'd be pretty

> happy if calorie restriction wasn't necessary though.

>

> -

>

>

> >

> > > Hi guys,

> > >

> > > I just finished 'Nourishing Traditions' by Sally Fallon and it was one

> > > of the best books I've ever read. I've found some of the information

> > > quite shocking but I've completely changed my mind about several

> > > things. It goes against all orthodoxy and even what I think most CRON

> > > members would advocate. The first 70 pages and last 10 are nutritional

> > > information and practical tips. I'm going to let my family read it: it

> > > has great motivational information against trans fat and sugar (but I

> > Why butter is actually very healthy as well

> > > as coconut oil and palm kernel oil as well as high fat milk and

> > > non-lean animal problems.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

> from what I've read laboratory mice don't live

> longer than mice in the wild, even if they're

> calorie restricted.

Calorie restriction has extended the maximum lifespan of mice by nearly 50%

(the equivalent of a human living to 165 or so...). Lab mice that eat

whatever they want still live longer than wild mice, 'cause they're less

likely to get disease or be eaten.

> What do these Inuit people die of, though?

> Perhaps it's environmental factors and such?

Now? Suicide, cancer, heart disease... My point was that they had no

reduction in the aging process due to ketosis (*very* low carb diets). A

diet with good fat content may help stabilize blood sugar, insulin response,

and could lead a host of general health benefits, but it won't make you live

longer than normal. That nutrition and disease prevention, not maximum

life-span extension.

In terms of extending the length of time you're likely to be alive (rather

than just reducing the likelihood of disease), CR is really it. There isn't

anything else on the market, so to speak. In plain speak, even if you

eliminated disease, you might make it to 100 or so, and some very lucky

folks might even go longer (but *very* few make it past 110) -- CR, while

reducing the incidence of disease, also slows the rate of aging, so you can

delay becoming functionally 'old' for a longer part of that time, and you

can extend that time itself. The average lifespan might jump from the late

seventies to the one-hundred & teens or twenties, with a few folks making

the outside of 160. In other words, making average lifespan comparable to

the current human maximum (the point at which everything just breaks,

regardless of disease).

Cheers,

________________________

Gifford

3-5 Humanities Centre

Department of English

University of Alberta

www.ualberta.ca/~gifford

[Guest guest]

> Well, I've been doing a lot of thinking and I'm no longer sure about

> anything. It seems that ~insulin~ is the common denominator, not

> calories consumed. The tests on mice and monkeys are done with

> unnatural foods and experiments with GM mice have shown insulin to be

> the key determinant of health.

:

What *really* matters are the Calories!

This works at the full range of nature, from unicelular to pluricelular.

From rats, gumpies and monkes (and humans).

Be sure to count the calories (only).

Do you have a precision ballance?

This is a good investiment for your whole life.

I would sugest you buy one. I have one at my house that weight in the

range 0-3000 g. It costed R$ 220,00 ($ 73,00 at USA). You weight

what you eat and use DWIDP or other nutrition software (like DietPower)

to calculate the calories and nutrients).

>

> So I'm not sure anymore. CR does work, but perhaps only because it's

> cutting carbs. I don't know what to think currently. I'd be pretty

What maters in the release of insulin (specially IGF-1 and IGFBP) are

the calories, calories, calories (mantra). These two molecules controls

aging (the binding of IGF-1 to IGF-1R is suposed to acelerate aging).

Other homones (GH, T, Cortisol) are mediated by CR. Of course

hormonal regulation do not makes sense for unicelular (they don't have

glads). In the unicelular the only thing that maters are the calories

consumed by

the cell: in protozoa the molarity of glucose in of water solution is the

determinant

of their longevity. So keep your eyes open. Another thing that

influences

longevity is body temp. CR decreases body temp from 37 to 36. ONLY

CALORIC RESTRICTION is able to do this. In other words this is not

obtained by restriction of fat, proteins or carbs. 1 C decreases leads to

10% increase in life because of Arrhenius Equation. So beyond mediating

insulin, CR acts in ** ALL ** aging process.

Hope to this helps to clarify things to you.

-- Gandhi.