Guest guest Posted August 9, 2002 Report Share Posted August 9, 2002 One problem with milk is the amount of hormones and chemicals it contains, but another large problem is pasteurization. Here is an article written by a chiro that explains milk pretty well http://www.mypath.net/gotmilk.html. Organic, non-pasteurized milk from grass fed/roaming cows is something different and is a nutritious food. here is an article by a nutritionist that breaks down the sugar options out there and why some are more nutritious than others http://www.rwood.com/Questions/q_may_01_2001.htm Hope that helps! thessa herbal remedies, " mrsboston_322002 " <mrsboston_322002> wrote: > Ok I've found it easier than I thought changing to organic foods and > supplements. They taste great and I get them cheaper driving out to > the organic farms rather then buying them in the grocery store (the > drive is a nice break as well). Well this lady I met while at the > farm said that she doesn't drink milk or eat sugar. A few others > overheard and said the same thing to me. They said stuff like, > poison, mucous building and artery blockers, bad for the digestive > track and so on. I didn't want to ask them for a lecture on it, so I > thanked them for the tips and left. Can someone explain what exactly > IS wrong with milk and sugar consumption?? A link, literature or any > info that shows the negative effects of both on the body would help. > I'm talking organic now, not commercial. If they're really that bad, > what can be used in their place? Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2002 Report Share Posted August 9, 2002 This is probably the biggest can of worms in the entire whole foods movement. Yes, there are people who have had health problems, who were cured when they stopped eating dairy and sugar. I'll briefly cover these separately: SUGAR Bad to the bone. This stuff reeks in many ways. Even to a point where i know on this very list we have a least one fanatic who opposes eating any sugar any time under all circumstances, who makes some very good points. Most commercial (or " hard " ) sugar, no matter what the source, will cause problems, depending on a person's overall health and weaknesses. This includes even " healthy " sugar types such as brown, turbinado, and organic. On a technical level, all these sugars will create problems with insulin. If a person is generally healthy, this may not be noticed. But if there is any reason for weakness in the pancreas area, wild mood swings, fatigue, and many other symptoms too numerous to list will appear. These conditions can eventually lead to diabetes. Hard sugars also can provide a medium inside the body that feeds fungus. I have in my own family dealt with a case of a rare environmental fungus having persisted in somebody's guts for several years, causing intermittent severe stomachaches that doctors could never diagnose. I won't go into the icky details of how i managed to figure out what was going on, but when this person cut way down on sugar, she got a lot better. More commonly you will see cases of massive candida overgrowth being fed by hard sugars. Interestingly enough, when a person is affected by any fungus like that, often the fungus will generate cravings for more sugar to feed itself. This has only recently been documented, reported in an issue of Discovery magazine in 2000. Sometimes people fall into a trap of craving sugar due to extreme sorrow. It was noted back in the mid-1700s that diabetes was most common among children who had lost one or both parents. When a person is overcome by sorrow, there gets to be this idea that nothing in life can be sweet. Somehow this idea can be transmitted to the pancreas, and cause the severe insulin fluctuations that eventually manifest as diabetes. There is a book that came out in the 70s called " Sugar Blues " . It should still be available, and is the best source of information on this subject. SUGAR REPLACEMENT The hardest of the hard sugars is sucrose. But dextrose and fructose (especially that derived from corn syrup) can be just as bad. So those two are not good replacements. Rice and barley malt are good substitutes for some people, but only under medical supervision IMO. Not a whole lot of exerience with these is currently available. Sorghum and molasses are mostly hard sugar, but they do have enough minerals in them to be of some benefit in some cases. Saccharin has been used for well over 100 years with few bad effects. That cancer thing applies only to those eating several grams a day -- those studies were cooked up to justify government approval of aspartame. Aspartame or NutraSweet is a deadly poison. If we had a decent, clean government, its sale would have been prohibited. Several other chemical substitutes such as cyclamates have generated a lot of bad reports. Xylitol, a substitute popular in Europe, seems to have few bad effects. Sorbitol can cause diarreha. Stevia is getting more popular. It has a bitter aftertaste that a lot of people don't like. I've experimented with it as a medicine against sorrow, and it seems somewhat workable. The problem with all sugar replacements is that they cause appetite problems. Most of the time, if a person has eaten something sweet, they soon crave more food. In fact the Chinese often start out a meal with something sweet in order to take advantage of this phenomenon. (If a person has gone for too long without food, as often happens in China, the appetite becomes suppressed and must be stimulated.) Diet sodas and candies don't really work -- research has proven many times over that consuming these products has no effect whatsoever on weight in almost all cases. I'm sure you can look that up for yourself -- i don't have time right now to recover all those references. DAIRY This is much more complicated than the situation with sugar. In our country, dairy has been over-sold to a great degree, in order to protect farmers from the effects of their increased efficiency of production. At this time, we're assuming that you're going to stick with organic dairy products, because there are known problems with hormones and drugs given to dairy cows. I personally have, in my own research (which consists of lots of interviews combined with historical and anthropological studies) managed to trace some specific tribes composed mainly of people who thrive on dairy. This includes: Mongolians, Tartars, Chuvash, Chechnyans, Bulgarians, Helvetians (part of the Swiss nation), Black Austrians, and some of the Nordic people. I'm still trying to determine if certain sections of the Nordic people are ok with it, including the Rus, Faerie, and Thor subgroups. There is at least one African group, the Masai, that is known to thrive on a heavy dairy diet. Several subgroups of European nations have a high tolerance for dairy, including many in Eastern Europe and possibly some of the Celts and French. This all has to do with the presence or absence of digestive enzymes, although the specifics of which enzymes are present or absent in particular people has not yet been worked out. So always the ultimate guideline is how each individual does after eliminating dairy for about 6 weeks. D'Amato, in his Eat Right 4 Your Type work, says that only people with Blood Type B are ok with dairy. (He claims that Chinese people would digest it all right if they would give it a few weeks -- i'm not so sure about that.) So when determining whether or not to cut out dairy, check out your ancestry and blood type. If your ancestors belonged to any of the tribes listed, or groups related to them, you may be all right. Otherwise, you may gain huge benefits from reducting or eliminating dairy products. On Thu, 08 Aug 2002 15:30:20 -0000 mrsboston_322002 <mrsboston_322002 wrote: > Ok I've found it easier than I thought changing > to organic foods and > supplements. They taste great and I get them > cheaper driving out to > the organic farms rather then buying them in > the grocery store (the > drive is a nice break as well). Well this lady > I met while at the > farm said that she doesn't drink milk or eat > sugar. A few others > overheard and said the same thing to me. They > said stuff like, > poison, mucous building and artery blockers, > bad for the digestive > track and so on. I didn't want to ask them for > a lecture on it, so I > thanked them for the tips and left. Can someone > explain what exactly > IS wrong with milk and sugar consumption?? A > link, literature or any > info that shows the negative effects of both on > the body would help. > I'm talking organic now, not commercial. If > they're really that bad, > what can be used in their place? Thanks. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2002 Report Share Posted August 10, 2002 Michael Riversong wrote: > > Xylitol, a substitute popular in Europe, seems to have few bad effects. VRP (http://www.vrp.com/) is very big on Xylitol. They just can't seem to be able to shut up about its health benefits. Roman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2002 Report Share Posted August 10, 2002 thessakate wrote: >Organic, non-pasteurized milk > from grass fed/roaming cows is something different and is a > nutritious food. A pretty good (not without inaccuracies, though) source of info about benefits of raw nonhomogenized milk from pastured animals is http://www.realmilk.org/ Especially, read http://realmilk.com/milkcure.html http://www.westonaprice.org/ is also a good place to peruse. Roman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 11, 2002 Report Share Posted August 11, 2002 I like chocolate with Maltitol instead of sugar. Tastes great. http://www.hauserchocolates.com/cgi-local/SoftCart.exe/online- store/scstore/sugarfree_cook.htm?E+scstore Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 11, 2002 Report Share Posted August 11, 2002 Michael Riversong wrote: > > Sorghum and molasses are mostly hard sugar, but they do have enough minerals > in them to be of some benefit in some cases. Isn't sorghum a name for grain like fruits? It's got to have more than carbs. > Saccharin has been used for well over 100 years with few bad effects. That > cancer thing applies only to those eating several grams a day -- those studies > were cooked up to justify government approval of aspartame. But isn't several grams a day would be a regular amount anybody would consume if saccharin were to be used as a sugar replacement? Roman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 11, 2002 Report Share Posted August 11, 2002 My understanding is that sorghum is a specific plant, which is grown primarily as animal feed. I say this because i have walked through sorghum fields in Kansas. Very small amounts of saccharine are needed in comparison to sugar. Something like 1/10th of a gram will do for a whole bottle of soda. Those packets you find in restaurants are mostly inert material to make it look and feel more like sugar. On Sun, 11 Aug 2002 10:15:53 -0500 Roman <r_rom wrote: > Michael Riversong wrote: > > > > Sorghum and molasses are mostly hard sugar, > but they do have enough minerals > > in them to be of some benefit in some cases. > > Isn't sorghum a name for grain like fruits? > It's got to have more than > carbs. > > > > Saccharin has been used for well over 100 > years with few bad effects. That > > cancer thing applies only to those eating > several grams a day -- those studies > > were cooked up to justify government approval > of aspartame. > > But isn't several grams a day would be a > regular amount anybody would > consume if saccharin were to be used as a sugar > replacement? > > Roman > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 12, 2002 Report Share Posted August 12, 2002 > D'Amato, in his Eat Right 4 Your Type work, says that only people with Blood Type B are ok with dairy. Interesting, because he okays quite a lot of dairy for AB folks. I know a number of O folks who know they can't tolerate it, though. Melinda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 13, 2002 Report Share Posted August 13, 2002 If Maltitol makes you feel bad maybe you shouldn't take it. You could be allergic to it. This site explains a lot about it: http://www.spipolyols.com/allpolyol.htm herbal remedies, Ann Melin <annicola> wrote: > Can you explain what exactly maltitol is? I've had it a couple of times and > find that it makes me feel really bizarre... kind of a nervous jittery > feeling. Anybody else ever experience this with maltitol? > > Ann > > > --- skybyrd51 <skybird@s...> wrote: > > I like chocolate with Maltitol instead of sugar. Tastes great. > > > > http://www.hauserchocolates.com/cgi-local/SoftCart.exe/online- > > store/scstore/sugarfree_cook.htm?E+scstore > > > > > > > > > > Federal Law requires that we warn you of the following: > > 1. Natural methods can sometimes backfire. > > 2. If you are pregnant, consult your physician before using any natural > > remedy. > > 3. The Constitution guarantees you the right to be your own physician and > > to > > prescribe for your own health. > > We are not medical doctors although MDs are welcome to post here as long > > as > > they behave themselves. > > Any opinions put forth by the list members are exactly that, and any > > person > > following the advice of anyone posting here does so at their own risk. > > It is up to you to educate yourself. By accepting advice or products > > from list members, you are agreeing to > > be fully responsible for your own health, and hold the List Owner and > > members free of any liability. > > > > Dr. Ian Shillington > > Doctor of Naturopathy > > Dr.IanShillington@G... > > > > 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.