meat and cancer

[Guest guest]

> After 100 years Eli JOnes has been shown to be 100% right, after all the well wishes of more than 4000 cancer cases cant be in vain.

........http://health./message/2018

 

it is important to distinguish what "meat" means in these studies

for example, in many of these studies a "hamburger" is considered meat, when in reality we are talking about the lowest quality antibiotic/hormone-fed meat blackened on a grill, and served between two refined white flour, hydrogenated oil sugar buns, with refined oil mayonaisse and sugary-sweet articificially colored condiments

 

the fact of the matter is that ALL these studies generalize their findings because its impossible to separate out someone who eats meat as per the above example (which is most americans) and organic/free-range/wild meat in a balanced diet with vegetables and other foods - it is these same studies that tell you that dietary fat is bad, but do not look at even basic issues in the quality and types of fat

 

rather, it is better to compare the incidence of cancer in communities that eat the modern, western diet, and compare this to the diets of other, more traditional communities

 

you will find that the research shows that it is the modern WESTERN diet that causes cancer, i.e. a diet low in fiber, fruits and vegetables, comprised of hormone-fed meat, refined grains and oils, and a multitude of additives

 

and as i already posted to the list, the communities that tend to be the longest lived, such as in Hunza or Azerbajan, all eat some meat as well other non-veg foods like fish or eggs

 

to my thinking, cancer is a disease of excess - it can occur when we overload and retain in our bodies not only with the filth we find in our food, air and water, but also when we over-consume any 'sweet' food - meat, sugar, grains, fat etc, out of balance with the other

six tastes

 

in the west, how many people eat bitter, sour, pungent or astringent? very few, or if they do, they are bizarre modern fascimiles of a more ancient food, like yellow mustard, sweet

bread and butter pickles, or "spicy" flavor nacho chips...

 

ayurveda elegantly shows us how to balance all these components, and in doing so, tells us that some meat in the diet is conducive to good health - and not just Charaka or Suhsruta either, but Vagbhata, Chakrapani, Bhavamishra etc all say the same thing - just

read the sections of rtucharya (seasonal regimen)

 

> Even if ayurveda supports meat as a medicine for Vata, Aryans were meat eaters, hunter-gatherers survived on meat, time has come to re-

> interprete ayurveda itself. It is no longer Charaka or Sushruta but

> Cancer, Diabetes and Heart disease are the best tutors.

 

please don't take this the wrong way, or as an indictment of India or Indian culture (which hopefully i have taken enough care to suggest that I love love love), but if we play the game of statistics, we will see that although India has the world's largest population of

vegetarians, according to the Diabetes Atlas (2nd ed) it also has the highest number of diabetics (35.5 million) compared neighbouring non-vegetarian China (23.8 million), and is the world leader in impaired glucose tolerance (85.6 m) vs China (33.2 m) - so perhaps there is a lesson here too

 

what is interesting and obvious to me, Figure 1.1 (Differences in the prevalence of type 2 diabetes among selected ethnic groups, 2003) in the Diabetes Atlas, shows an enormous difference in the prevalence of diabetes between populations that eat traditional foods versus those that have become urbanized, for example, the prevalence of diabetes among rural Bangladeshis is less than 5%, whereas Indians naturalized in Singapore have a prevalence of close to 25%

 

as for cancer, according to Global Cancer Statistics, 2002 (2), the regions with the lowest rates of cancer are once again, in Africa and also Oceania, which are also not vegetarian (eating goat and fish, respectively) - India is low compared to Europe and North America,

but higher than non-vegetarian Japan and Latin America

 

so, my final analysis? - the rising incidence of diabetes and cancer isn't related to a simple argument of vegetarianism or non-vegetarianism at all, but is directly related to the encroaching influence of the urbanized western diet and refined foodstuffs

 

it is interesting that this conclusion, borne by the evidence, parallels much so what Weston Price observed in his "Nutritional and Physical Degeneration" almost a century ago

sources:

 

1. Diabetes Atlas (2nd ed)

http://www.eatlas.idf.org/webdata/docs/Atlas%202003-Summary.pdf

 

2. Global Cancer Statistics (2002)

http://www.oralcancerfoundation.org/facts/pdf/worldcancer.pdf

Caldecott