Guest guest Posted October 25, 2003 Report Share Posted October 25, 2003 On page 78 of 120YD, Dr Walford states: " The second reason for losing weight slowly concerns the release into the blood of toxic materials, such as pesticide residues, out of your own stores of bodily fat. Certain pesticide residues like DDE (from DDT), as well as dioxin and the PCBs, plus others, are not broken down very rapidly by the detoxifying enzymes of the body. However, because they are fat soluble, they are prevented from doing harm by being absorbed into the body's fat. " There's an accompanying graph, that indicates for the two years of the Biosphere 2 experiment there were 3 to 4 times the elevated level of DDE and PCBs in the bloodstream of the participants. Dr Walford concludes by saying, " Therefore, you should lose weight slowly enough for the released toxins to be cleared without getting too high. " Fish farmers routinely use PCBs and other toxins to keep fish free of disease (see post 5363) so it obviously isn't a health concern for people who bring food to market. Without trying to be controversial, might we not also conclude that there is an added benefit to CRONies in donating blood? It chases away the blues AND the toxins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 15, 2008 Report Share Posted September 15, 2008 Do you know what year this was written? Thanks, **************Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog, plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com. (http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty00050000000014) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 15, 2008 Report Share Posted September 15, 2008 Jeanine: you posted some information from a verternarian toxicologist. I scanned over the materials and found it rather useless with respect to human toxic exposures. For example, the section onf hydrogen sulfe only cited animal studies. The author did not cite any of the human studies done on hydrogen sulfide. There, his conclusions and suggestion do not apply to humans. I would suggest that before posting such materials take a look at the references cited and see if it pertains to humans. Jack D. Thrasher, Ph.D. Toxicologist/Immunotoxicologist/Fetaltoxicologist www.drthrasher.org toxicologist1@... Off: 530--644-6035 Cell - 575-937-1150 L. Crawley, M.ED., LADC Trauma Specialist sandracrawley@... 530-644-6035 - Off 775-309-3994 - Cell This message and any attachments forwarded with it is to be considered privileged and confidential. The forwarding or redistribution of this message (and any attachments) without my prior written consent is strictly prohibited and may violate privacy laws. Once the intended purpose of this message has been served, please destroy the original message contents. If you have received this message in error, please reply immediately to advise the sender of the miscommunication and then delete the message and any copies you have printed. Thank you in advance for your compliance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 15, 2008 Report Share Posted September 15, 2008 no, but the earliest reference is 2001 so I'd guess some time around 2002-04. good info. -knowledge of mycotoxin effects. but considering theres still that question of exactly what can happen when your in the war zone of myco's and bacteria's at the same time.?? hard to say what influenced that comment at the end. > > Do you know what year this was written? > > Thanks, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 15, 2008 Report Share Posted September 15, 2008 yes,Mr.Thrasher, Do you mean that veternary toxicology cannot often be applied to human toxicology because of the vast differences between animals and human systems or just that this one article was way off? I've heard we have more in common with pigs and dogs, why are studies mostly centered around mice and rats? from a few articles I've read it seems they are missing some features that humans have that pertain to our illness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 15, 2008 Report Share Posted September 15, 2008 Dr. Thrasher, how come monkey's aren't used more for human studies? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 16, 2008 Report Share Posted September 16, 2008 Dr. Thrasher, Is there a really good toxicology book that you recommend??? Also, have a question. I was reading an article that phenols are one way to inhibit the growth of mold ie. in food. Upon further reading, I noticed that phenols include a large variety of substances if the website I looked at was correct. Is there something specific in the structure of some phenols verses others that make them more effective as prevention for mold growth?? Kim 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.