Guest guest Posted December 28, 2006 Report Share Posted December 28, 2006 Essential Carb Comparisons JoAnn Guest Dec 28, 2006 11:21 PST --- Essential Carb Comparisons Natural fructose in raw fruits and vegetables, whole-fiber food in it's natural form, can be readily digested with no resultant breakdown of our enzyme and mineral stores. Conversely, simple carbs in white sugar, white bread, canned and processed foods, require a host of additional nutrients from existing bodily stores to effectively complete the 'digestive process'.All of these precise nutrients our bodies had other plans for, have to be " mobilized " in order to deal with 150 pounds yearly of a devitalized non-food substance (namely, sugar and/or processed isolated simple carbs. Obviously, apples produce natural sugars otherwise known as fructose, while potatoes contain natural starches better known to us as cellulose. Wholesome organic raw foods always contain nutrient components which nourish and sustain. Processed foods on the other hand provide us with little or no nutrition and only a handful of *isolated* carbs with little or no food value. Subsequently digestive reactions are one of irritation, removal, and 'defense' instead of " nutrition " . Your body is innately predisposed to regard these processed carbs/sugars as nothing other than a foreign substance or chemically derived drug. On the other hand when complex carbohydrates are brokn down, the result is a usable glucose molecule capable of providing sustenance. Apples and potatoes grown in good soils contain an abundance of healthy components... vitamins, minerals, and important enzymes. In their natural state these foods are known as *complex* carbohydrates,meaning that they are wholesome " complete " foods. On the other hand however, White table sugar has literally no known nutrients. White bread is a processed, 'artificial' starch. These are not wholesome foods - they do not provide us with nourishment. For obvious reasons they are known as " simple " (processed) carbs. Even when broken down into individual glucose molecules by digestion, the glucose end-product is quite different from that of a digested apple, This is because apples do not simply break down into *isolated* glucose molecules. There are other nutrients and co-factors present, which are essential for the body to make use of the glucose: they are called enzymes, minerals, and vitamins. Most doctors and nutritionists fail to make the distinction between simple and complex carbohydrates. Lots of information, very little understanding. With sugar,ingestion is far different from digestion, just because you ate it doesn't mean you can use it. This is why counting calories, food combining and blood typing and other passing fads are so irrelevant -its not what you eat; its what you digest that's important. When simple (refined) sugars ferment in the digestive tract and are not broken down, the resulting alcohol,acetic acid, water, and carbon dioxide are not usable desirable digestive components! (Dufty p 183). --- 1.sugar cannot be digested. 2.Sugar " inactivates " digestive enzymes and remains in the intestinal tract, fermenting. 3,Some of this toxic mass gradually seeps into the bloodstream where it - acidifies our bloodstream. Not only does this half-digested sugar kill off our good bacteria, Candida thrive on it! These half-digested sugars become fermented like wine or liquor. Undigested simple carbs eventually start to leak into the bloodstream ( resulting in high tryiglycerides, formation of arterial plaque), into the joints ( arthritis), muscles ( fibro and CFS), organs (the liver, causing fatty liver) - literally any place they can lodge. So you see refined sugar stimulates a whole range of " physiological responses " , --all of which are unnecessary, all of which waste the energy of the cells and systems, and all of which are followed by a condition of exhaustion after the brief rush subsides. All of the precise nutrients our bodies had other plans for, have to be " mobilized " in order to deal with 150 pounds per year of this devitalized non-food substance. The basic problem with an *over-acid* digestive tract is that the *good*bacteria,the intestinal flora are destroyed. As their job is the final stage of digestion. Without them, there is just a rotting and stagnation of foods. Diets high in proteins and low in carbohydrates are typically devoid of fibre. Very few animal proteins are completely digested, resulting inapproximately 2 g of nitrogen in undigested proteins, peptides and amino acids (equivalent to 12 g of protein) that enter thelarge intestine daily. The bacteria in the large bowel would prefer to utilize carbohydrate residues to meet our energy needs, but when carbohydrate levels are low and protein levels high,then amino acids are metabolised resulting in the release of ammonia and phenol, both of which are potential carcinogens. Cookedmeat, in addition, also contain other potentially harmful substances (such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, heterocyclic amines, and N-nitroso compounds). These potentially harmful substances should be eliminated from our system as rapidly as possible, and if sufficient fibre were present in the diet, the time this food is retained in the intestines would be considerably reduced. It is known that urinary *phenol* levels increase when subjects are fed high-meat diets. Low phenol levels decrease cancer risk. A whole-foods diet, high in fibre content has proven to be beneficial to achieve low levels of these toxic compounds Biological Magnification- In addition to the aforementioned compounds, animals are also known to concentrate environmental pollutants such as heavy metals, pesticides, herbicides and industrial toxins in their fatty tissue. These toxins become concentrated in the tissues of organisms as they pass through the food chain. The concentrating process is called biological magnification and is responsible for widespread decimation of animal life on earth. Moreover, if species are harvested for human consumption from the top of the food chain, then these concentrated toxins are transferred to the human consumer. Humans that rely largely on animal products for their sustenance, will experience similar accumulations of toxic compounds as do the top carnivores in nature, and a reduction, or even avoidance of animal products can enhance the capacity to cope with disease. In the case of a relatively high intake intake of fibre, the partly fermented residual polysaccharides, derived from these fibres, absorb water,leading to increased fecal mass and decreased transit time, thus reducing the time that potentially harmful substances such as carcinogens remain in the large bowel.,[ii] With a high meat consumption, however, the harmful substances can remain in the intestines for much longer periods, This exposure has been linked to increased cancer rates. In this regard, the relationship between colorectal cancer and meat consumption is well established. Scientific evidence implicates a high protein, low-fiber diet as one cause of bowel cancer. Besides being low in fibre, the compounds in meat most commonly linked to the promotion of tumours are ammonia, phenols, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, heterocyclic amines, and N-nitroso compounds. Within the gut, the limited availability of whole plant foods in high- meat diets will lead to an increase in ammonia concentration in the colon because bacteria will metabolize the protein *residues* which enter the gut when carbohydrate levels are low. Ammonia, in turn, increases cell proliferation and alters DNA synthesis and has, therefore, been implicated in colon cancer. A high-meat diet also allows more aromatic amino acids, such as phenylaline and tyrosine to enter the colon. Gut bacteria produce cresol and phenol when they metabolize these amino acids. Both cresol and phenol have been associated with the promotion of skin and colon cancer and rapid elimination of these compounds seems advisable, even if their effect on the gut mucosa has not been fully resolved. A diet rich in plant fibre can once again assist in clearance of thesecompounds by incresing the food transit time. --- What Is Dioxin? It is the nastiest,most toxic man-made organic chemical; its toxicity is second only to radioactive waste. Since dioxin is fat-soluble, it bioaccumulates up the food chain and it is mainly (97.5%) found in meat and dairy products (beef, dairy products, milk, chicken, pork, and fish in that order. In EPA's dioxin report, they refer to dioxin as hydrophobic. This means that dioxin avoids " vegetation " . Rather,Dioxin will find animals to go into,working its way to the top of the food chain.. The above has been excerpted from the book " Diet and Health " by Professor Walter J. Veith. -- White sugar is a simple carbohydrate,meaning it is a fractionated,artificial, devitalized by-product,of the original plant. " --- http://www.geocities.com/mrsjoguest/AIM.html http://www.geocities.com/mrsjoguest/Diets.html JoAnn Guest mrsjo- www.geocities.com/mrsjoguest/Diets Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 29, 2006 Report Share Posted December 29, 2006 so eating Plants lessens it? (please see last 2 lines of this page What Is Dioxin? It is the nastiest,most toxic man-made organic chemical; its toxicity is second only to radioactive waste. Since dioxin is fat-soluble, it bioaccumulates up the food chain and it is mainly (97.5%) found in meat and dairy products (beef, dairy products, milk, chicken, pork, and fish in that order. In EPA's dioxin report, they refer to dioxin as hydrophobic. This means that dioxin avoids " vegetation " . Rather,Dioxin will find animals to go into,working its way to the top of the food chain.. The above has been excerpted from the book " Diet and Health " by Professor Walter J. Veith. , " JoAnn Guest " <angelprincessjo wrote: > > Essential Carb Comparisons > JoAnn Guest > Dec 28, 2006 11:21 PST > -- - > Essential Carb Comparisons > > Natural fructose in raw fruits and vegetables, whole-fiber food in > it's natural form, can be readily digested with no resultant > breakdown of our enzyme and mineral stores. Conversely, simple carbs > in white sugar, white bread, canned and processed foods, require a > host of additional nutrients from existing bodily stores to > effectively complete the 'digestive process'.All of these precise > nutrients our bodies had other plans for, have to be " mobilized " in > order to deal with 150 pounds yearly of a devitalized non-food > substance (namely, > sugar and/or processed isolated simple carbs. > > Obviously, apples produce natural sugars otherwise > known as fructose, while potatoes contain natural starches better > known to us as cellulose. Wholesome organic raw foods always contain nutrient components which nourish and sustain. > > Processed foods on the other hand provide us with little or no nutrition and only a handful of *isolated* carbs with little or no food value. Subsequently digestive reactions are one of irritation, removal, and 'defense' instead of " nutrition " . Your body is innately predisposed to regard these processed carbs/sugars as nothing other than a foreign substance or chemically derived drug. > > On the other hand when complex carbohydrates are brokn down, the > result is a usable glucose molecule capable of providing sustenance. > > Apples and potatoes grown in good soils contain an abundance of healthy components... > vitamins, minerals, and important enzymes. In their natural state > these foods are known as *complex* carbohydrates,meaning that they are wholesome " complete " foods. > > On the other hand however, White table sugar has literally no known nutrients. White bread is a processed, 'artificial' starch. > These are not wholesome foods - they do not provide us with nourishment. For obvious reasons > they are known as " simple " (processed) carbs. > Even when broken down into individual glucose molecules by > digestion, the glucose end-product is quite different from that > of a digested apple, This is > because apples do not simply break down into *isolated* glucose > molecules. > > There are other nutrients and co-factors present, > which are essential for the body to make use of the glucose: they > are > called enzymes, minerals, and vitamins. > > > Most doctors and nutritionists fail to make the distinction between > simple and complex carbohydrates. > Lots of information, very little understanding. > 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.