Can Hertel be taken seriously?

[Guest guest]

I spent a good part of yesterday researching the various claims that

microwaving food is deleterious to human health. Frankly, when

weighing the evidence critically, I don't think there is credible

evidence to support this contention.

 

I agree with Phil that Hertel's evidence is slight and his credentials

are open to question. Generally, a single piece of research is

meaningless until others have replicated that research and proven it

dependable.

 

In addition, one of the principles of critical reading is to identify

any biases held by the author as part of judging the validity of their

position. Most of the cites supporting the idea that microwave oven

cokking is dangerous to human health appear to be very biased in their

belief and uncritical in their citation of any supporting literature.

 

Just my two cents.

 

Bob

 

, " "

< wrote:

>

> Hi Roger,

>

> > Do a Google search for " hans hertel microwaved food " for more

> > information.

>

> Google has many hits referring to a published experiment, said to

> have been done by Hertel & a colleague. However, a search of Google

> Scholar failed to locate that paper, as did a search of Medline.

>

> Various WWW references call Hertel a medical researcher, professor,

> biologist, food chemist. However, I understand that Dr Ing. Hans

> Hertel was an engineer. He worked as a food scientist for a Swiss

> firm.

>

> http://tinyurl.com/62x4wx says: " Hans Hertel ... and seven fellow

> vegetarians confined themselves to a hotel for two months in the late

> 1980s. There, they consumed milk and vegetables prepared in the

> microwave oven and in other ways.

>

> Hertel emerged with an astonishing pronouncement. Eating microwaved

> milk and vegetables caused changes in the men's blood that " appear to

> indicate the initial stage of a pathological process such as occurs

> at the start of a cancerous condition. "

>

> Hertel didn't actually find that microwaved food caused cancer. And

> his " study, " which no researchers have tried to reproduce, was never

> peer-reviewed of published in a scientific journal.

>

> " Without knowing more about how he conducted his study, what he

> measured, how he measured it, and what he found, it's impossible to

> even begin to evaluate his findings, " says Barry Swanson, a food

> scientist at Washington State University in Pullman. Hertel has

> dropped out of public view. "

>

> That " experiment " was published in a magazine and rehashed in several

> WWW sites as a serious experiment. If THAT is the extent of Hertel's

> microvave research, it is risable. The work was not published in a

> reputable journal (I'm not surprised!); there were no controls; there

> was no follow-up experiment and other food scientists have not

> thought it worthwhile to repeat the work.

>

> I could not find (in any peer-reviewed science journal) a single

> paper authored or co-authored by Hertel in food science. Maybe I

> missed some. So, if any of you can find links to ANY paper published

> by Hans Hertel in a peer-reviewed science journal, please email the

> link.

>

> IMO, the paucity (if not absence) of Hertel's scientific publications

> suggests that he cannot have been a serious scientific researcher.

>

> Best regards,

>

>

[Guest guest]

Bob Rountree, a highly respected practitioner and medical researcher in

Boulder was very clear about the negative effects of microwaves on certain

nutrients. I think this was in 2005 at Robert Crayhons Nutrient expo. I

don't have the notes from the talk. I don't expect folks on this forum to

change their opinions based on my unspecific tertiary report, but I have

enough respect for Bob that I will not use a microwave for foodstuffs if I

can avoid it. If memory serves, he talked about cancer fighting nutrients

in berries, and how microwaving the berries eradicated specifically those

nutrients. If anyone in Boulder is in touch with Dr Rountree, we may be

able to get him to provide more information. If anyone has a good

relationship with Xymogen, that may also be a way in b/c Bob is affiliated

with them.

 

Thanks,

Tim Sharpe

 

 

 

On Behalf Of Bob Flaws

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 9:47 AM

 

Re: Can Hertel be taken seriously?

 

I spent a good part of yesterday researching the various claims that

microwaving food is deleterious to human health. Frankly, when

weighing the evidence critically, I don't think there is credible

evidence to support this contention.

 

I agree with Phil that Hertel's evidence is slight and his credentials

are open to question. Generally, a single piece of research is

meaningless until others have replicated that research and proven it

dependable.

 

In addition, one of the principles of critical reading is to identify

any biases held by the author as part of judging the validity of their

position. Most of the cites supporting the idea that microwave oven

cokking is dangerous to human health appear to be very biased in their

belief and uncritical in their citation of any supporting literature.

 

Just my two cents.

 

Bob

[Guest guest]

, " Tim Sharpe "

<listserve wrote:

>

> Bob Rountree, a highly respected practitioner and medical

researcher in

> Boulder was very clear about the negative effects of microwaves on

certain

> nutrients. I think this was in 2005 at Robert Crayhons Nutrient

 

 

Something like this still doesn't have a lot of meaning. Certain

nutrients get affected. What does that mean for the person that eats

it? The food isn't as nutritious?

 

Anyway, a good study like this would also have to look at those same

nutrients after the berries were: boiled on a stovetop; fried on a

stove-top; deep fried in oil; baked in an oven; broiled in an oven;

cooked on a gas bbq grill; cooked on a traditional bbq grill; roasted

on an open fire; etc.

 

The nutrients probably never stood a chance anyway...

 

:')

 

Brian C. Allen, MSTOM

Oriental Medicine and Health Services

http://omhs.biz

[Guest guest]

Are there several issues here? One is the danger of microwaves and the other is

that

microwaves harm nutrients. The first is a real danger and the second is

rendering the herbs

not as effective.

 

And also whether the medium, plastic containers and/or the actual apparatus

(i.e. standing

next to the microwave cooker) can cause damage to the consumer.

The plastic container issue I think most would agree is a real problem.

 

Doug

[Guest guest]

Doug,

 

 

 

Wasn't the original statement a mere " microwaves destroy a lot of the qi in

fluids and

foods. " Wasn't this also prefaced by " I believe " ? If nutrients are proven

to be destroyed with microwaves then I agree that " qi " is damaged. How else

can we evaluate such a statement if not evaluating the nutrients? We can

evaluate it through taste and smell, but this is not good enough for the

people who only want Western research, which I feel is severely limited when

evaluating most aspects of CM.

 

 

 

Now, if this damage is anymore than a stovetop, I do not know. If this

microwave cooking changes some molecules to make them more harmful, I am not

sure. There is some compelling research out there. I personally have not

used a microwave for 19+ years.

 

 

 

I will say that I have the utmost respect for Bob Roundtree as a researcher.

He is quite the badass and is probably more savvy and experienced than

people on this list. Of course we " can " and should question everything, but

his words go a long way in my book.

 

 

 

-Jason

 

 

 

_____

 

 

On Behalf Of

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 2:50 PM

 

Re: Can Hertel be taken seriously?

 

 

 

Are there several issues here? One is the danger of microwaves and the other

is that

microwaves harm nutrients. The first is a real danger and the second is

rendering the herbs

not as effective.

 

And also whether the medium, plastic containers and/or the actual apparatus

(i.e. standing

next to the microwave cooker) can cause damage to the consumer.

The plastic container issue I think most would agree is a real problem.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Tim

were is the evidence coming from? Many good Dr have strange beliefs.

alon

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

From a speech entitled " Detoxification Update " at Boulderfest 2005, Bob

Rountree states: According to The Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry,

you lose 97% of flavonoids from cooking with microwave, boiling you lose 66%

of the flavonoids, if you steam you get minimal loss. I'm sure the handouts

for the lecture contain more, unfortunately I didn't buy those. In his

explanation, Bob goes into the biochemistry of Myrosinates hydrolyzing

glucosinolates (cleaving glucose groups). Cooking vegetables deactivates

myrosinase, thus you have to rely on the myrosinase indigenous to your gut.

 

 

 

 

It's difficult to follow all this without looking at the slides. I don't

know how much of the myrosinate biochem applies to the microwave info.

Regardless, his research is at least in part from the peer reviewed JAFC

mentioned above.

 

 

 

If someone is able to contact him in Boulder, I'm sure we can get more. As

Jason stated, Bob is a big dog in this field, and he's not prone to what I

call " pop culture nutrition " . From a research perspective, if he says it,

it would take a lot for me not to believe it. Again, I can't ask others to

have blind faith, we each have our own trusted sources.

 

 

 

-Tim Sharpe

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On Behalf Of bcataiji

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 3:11 PM

 

Re: Can Hertel be taken seriously?

 

 

 

, " Tim Sharpe "

 

<listserve wrote:

 

>

 

> Bob Rountree, a highly respected practitioner and medical

 

researcher in

 

> Boulder was very clear about the negative effects of microwaves on

 

certain

 

> nutrients. I think this was in 2005 at Robert Crayhons Nutrient

 

 

 

 

 

Something like this still doesn't have a lot of meaning. Certain

 

nutrients get affected. What does that mean for the person that eats

 

it? The food isn't as nutritious?

 

 

 

Anyway, a good study like this would also have to look at those same

 

nutrients after the berries were: boiled on a stovetop; fried on a

 

stove-top; deep fried in oil; baked in an oven; broiled in an oven;

 

cooked on a gas bbq grill; cooked on a traditional bbq grill; roasted

 

on an open fire; etc.

 

 

 

The nutrients probably never stood a chance anyway...

 

 

 

:')

 

 

 

Brian C. Allen, MSTOM

 

Oriental Medicine and Health Services

 

http://omhs.biz

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

 

 

 

Chinese Herbal Medicine offers various professional services, including a

practitioner's directory and a moderated discussion forum.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hi Roger,

 

> Do a Google search for " hans hertel microwaved food " for more

> information.

 

Google has many hits referring to a published experiment, said to

have been done by Hertel & a colleague. However, a search of Google

Scholar failed to locate that paper, as did a search of Medline.

 

Various WWW references call Hertel a medical researcher, professor,

biologist, food chemist. However, I understand that Dr Ing. Hans

Hertel was an engineer. He worked as a food scientist for a Swiss

firm.

 

http://tinyurl.com/62x4wx says: " Hans Hertel ... and seven fellow

vegetarians confined themselves to a hotel for two months in the late

1980s. There, they consumed milk and vegetables prepared in the

microwave oven and in other ways.

 

Hertel emerged with an astonishing pronouncement. Eating microwaved

milk and vegetables caused changes in the men's blood that " appear to

indicate the initial stage of a pathological process such as occurs

at the start of a cancerous condition. "

 

Hertel didn't actually find that microwaved food caused cancer. And

his " study, " which no researchers have tried to reproduce, was never

peer-reviewed of published in a scientific journal.

 

" Without knowing more about how he conducted his study, what he

measured, how he measured it, and what he found, it's impossible to

even begin to evaluate his findings, " says Barry Swanson, a food

scientist at Washington State University in Pullman. Hertel has

dropped out of public view. "

 

That " experiment " was published in a magazine and rehashed in several

WWW sites as a serious experiment. If THAT is the extent of Hertel's

microvave research, it is risable. The work was not published in a

reputable journal (I'm not surprised!); there were no controls; there

was no follow-up experiment and other food scientists have not

thought it worthwhile to repeat the work.

 

I could not find (in any peer-reviewed science journal) a single

paper authored or co-authored by Hertel in food science. Maybe I

missed some. So, if any of you can find links to ANY paper published

by Hans Hertel in a peer-reviewed science journal, please email the

link.

 

IMO, the paucity (if not absence) of Hertel's scientific publications

suggests that he cannot have been a serious scientific researcher.

 

Best regards,

 

[Guest guest]

Some of this is anecdotal, but there is the image of what microwaves are,

compared to fire or steam, which may make the concept more accessible. Some

hospitals don't allow microwaving of baby foods and formulas because of hot

spots, but that is a physical not nutritional concern.

The effectiveness of microwave, which is exposure to intense (ac watts) rapid

polarity changes on millions of frequencies per second (Mhz), depends upon the

water or moisture content of the exposed substance. Water would heat the

fastest. Isomerism is the properties of molecular electrical integrity, which is

linear even up to the change that an organic substance undergoes even up into

boiling, (herbs for example). The wild excitation of microwaves sets up a

vibrational pattern unique and new used in the human food chain. Fire/ heat/

boiling is a steady increase, like a dc power, microwave is a instant rapid

electomagnetic shaking. And like the effects of genetically modified foods, we

may have to

look at the change in the intestinal flora, or immune strength of humans to see

if this process is wholesome.

And the anecdotal part is this; a guy i knew working a norad radar station in

the north and they put fake owls on the landscape to attract crows, and when the

crows flew thru the radar (microwave beams) the sizzled and died in the field.

Wow what fun.

 

--- On Tue, 6/24/08, Tim Sharpe <listserve wrote:

Tim Sharpe <listserve

RE: Re: Can Hertel be taken seriously?

 

Tuesday, June 24, 2008, 6:19 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

From a speech entitled " Detoxification Update " at Boulderfest 2005,

Bob

 

Rountree states: According to The Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry,

 

you lose 97% of flavonoids from cooking with microwave, boiling you lose 66%

 

of the flavonoids, if you steam you get minimal loss. I'm sure the handouts

 

for the lecture contain more, unfortunately I didn't buy those. In his

 

explanation, Bob goes into the biochemistry of Myrosinates hydrolyzing

 

glucosinolates (cleaving glucose groups). Cooking vegetables deactivates

 

myrosinase, thus you have to rely on the myrosinase indigenous to your gut.

 

 

 

It's difficult to follow all this without looking at the slides. I don't

 

know how much of the myrosinate biochem applies to the microwave info.

 

Regardless, his research is at least in part from the peer reviewed JAFC

 

mentioned above.

 

 

 

If someone is able to contact him in Boulder, I'm sure we can get more. As

 

Jason stated, Bob is a big dog in this field, and he's not prone to what I

 

call " pop culture nutrition " . From a research perspective, if he says it,

 

it would take a lot for me not to believe it. Again, I can't ask others to

 

have blind faith, we each have our own trusted sources.

 

 

 

-Tim Sharpe

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[] On Behalf Of bcataiji

 

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 3:11 PM

 

 

 

Re: Can Hertel be taken seriously?

 

 

 

, " Tim Sharpe "

 

 

 

<listserve@. ..> wrote:

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> Bob Rountree, a highly respected practitioner and medical

 

 

 

researcher in

 

 

 

> Boulder was very clear about the negative effects of microwaves on

 

 

 

certain

 

 

 

> nutrients. I think this was in 2005 at Robert Crayhons Nutrient

 

 

 

Something like this still doesn't have a lot of meaning. Certain

 

 

 

nutrients get affected. What does that mean for the person that eats

 

 

 

it? The food isn't as nutritious?

 

 

 

Anyway, a good study like this would also have to look at those same

 

 

 

nutrients after the berries were: boiled on a stovetop; fried on a

 

 

 

stove-top; deep fried in oil; baked in an oven; broiled in an oven;

 

 

 

cooked on a gas bbq grill; cooked on a traditional bbq grill; roasted

 

 

 

on an open fire; etc.

 

 

 

The nutrients probably never stood a chance anyway...

 

 

 

:')

 

 

 

Brian C. Allen, MSTOM

 

 

 

Oriental Medicine and Health Services

 

 

 

http://omhs. biz

 

 

 

------------ --------- --------- ------

 

 

 

Chinese Herbal Medicine offers various professional services, including a

 

practitioner' s directory and a moderated discussion forum.

 

 

 

http://www.chineseh erbacademy. org

[Guest guest]

By all means, let's see what Dr. Roundtree has to say about this

issue. However, in that process, let's also keep in mind that, as a

part and principal of Xymogen, Dr. Roundtree is a personally invested

proponent of a particular sub-set of Western medicine.

 

Why I say this: I personally don't care all that much about the actual

topic under discussion: microwave ovens, good or bad? What I'm

lobbying for is critical thinking and reading as medical

professionals. Judging the biases of an " authority " is just as

important to critical thinking and reading as are judging their

credentials. In other words, Dr. Roundtree is not a disinterested

medical scholar or researcher. Therefore, assessment of his point of

view must be tempered by that fact.

 

Pl-l-lease, this is not an attack or criticism of Bob. It most

emphatically is not. I respect Bob greatly. I am merely pointing

something out in terms of the standards of critical thinking and

reading. In fact, readers might want to Google " the principles and

practice of critical thinking " or something like that to understand

what I'm talking about.

 

As an extension of this, as an employee and principal of Blue Poppy

Enterprises, Inc., Bob Flaws is not a neutral and disinterested

medical scholar or researcher. Similarly, as a principal of Eastland

Press, Dan Bensky is not a neutral and disinterested medical scholar

and researcher. Same goes for Subhuti Dharmananda as a principal of

Seven Forests, Ted Kaptchuk as a principal of K'an, John Chen as a

principal of Evergreen Herbs/Lotus Seminars, John Scott as a principal

of Golden Flower, etc., etc., etc. When any of us or anyone else who

has a financial stake in a company selling goods and services to the

profession hold an opinion, there is the potential for a conflict of

interest and, therefore, a biased opinion. In such cases, readers of

that opinion should rightly question the " authority's " biases and

motives (which may or may not be neutral and above reproach). If one

does not question such potential conflicts of interests, then one is

not reading or thinking critically.

[Guest guest]

Bob is correct, eminence based medicine can be full of biases that needs to be

flushed. Assessing evidence is not simple and takes effort. Lets apply the same

standards to CM as well.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

I think the point below is valid, but fail to see its relevance here.

Comments on the effects of a kitchen appliance on flavonoids has IMHO no

bearing on personal vestiture. The recommendation after all was to cook by

steaming. I think we'd all have to agree that there is no conflict of

interest there. Boulderfest by design (due to CEU complications) as a whole

typically refrains from mentioning products and companies. Bob Crayhon

created another symposium called Nutrient Expo as an outlet for

practitioners to talk about specific products. Curiously, when Bob Rountree

spoke at nutrient expo I don't recall him mentioning a single Xymogen

product, though perhaps I missed a reference.

 

 

 

This reminds me of an issue I had when this thread got started. I

wholeheartedly agree that we must maintain academic rigor when making

claims, citing ones sources etc. Forcing that point on a post that started

with a clearly stated opinion seemed misplaced to me. Again, as mentioned

above, I agree with the concept, disagree with the application. This point

has been covered, clearly we agree to disagree.

 

 

 

I'll post further comments in a subsequent post.

 

 

 

-Tim Sharpe

 

 

 

 

 

On Behalf Of Bob Flaws

Wednesday, June 25, 2008 1:13 PM

 

Re: Can Hertel be taken seriously?

 

 

 

By all means, let's see what Dr. Roundtree has to say about this

 

issue. However, in that process, let's also keep in mind that, as a

 

part and principal of Xymogen, Dr. Roundtree is a personally invested

 

proponent of a particular sub-set of Western medicine.

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

The articles that I saw in the Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry

said that microwaving eliminated myrosinase activity after two minutes and

steaming eliminated it after seven. This was in brassica vegetables.

 

Here is a link .

 

http://pubs.acs.org/cgi-bin/abstract.cgi/jafcau/2006/54/i20/abs/jf0607314.ht

ml

 

 

 

Sean

 

 

 

 

On Behalf Of Tim Sharpe

Wednesday, June 25, 2008 4:13 PM

 

RE: Re: Can Hertel be taken seriously?

 

 

 

I think the point below is valid, but fail to see its relevance here.

Comments on the effects of a kitchen appliance on flavonoids has IMHO no

bearing on personal vestiture. The recommendation after all was to cook by

steaming. I think we'd all have to agree that there is no conflict of

interest there. Boulderfest by design (due to CEU complications) as a whole

typically refrains from mentioning products and companies. Bob Crayhon

created another symposium called Nutrient Expo as an outlet for

practitioners to talk about specific products. Curiously, when Bob Rountree

spoke at nutrient expo I don't recall him mentioning a single Xymogen

product, though perhaps I missed a reference.

 

This reminds me of an issue I had when this thread got started. I

wholeheartedly agree that we must maintain academic rigor when making

claims, citing ones sources etc. Forcing that point on a post that started

with a clearly stated opinion seemed misplaced to me. Again, as mentioned

above, I agree with the concept, disagree with the application. This point

has been covered, clearly we agree to disagree.

 

I'll post further comments in a subsequent post.

 

-Tim Sharpe

 

 

 

<%40>

[

<%40> ] On Behalf Of Bob Flaws

Wednesday, June 25, 2008 1:13 PM

 

<%40>

Re: Can Hertel be taken seriously?

 

By all means, let's see what Dr. Roundtree has to say about this

 

issue. However, in that process, let's also keep in mind that, as a

 

part and principal of Xymogen, Dr. Roundtree is a personally invested

 

proponent of a particular sub-set of Western medicine.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Following the research mentioned in The Journal of Agriculture and Food

Chemistry, I feel confident stating that if you affect nutrients, you affect

qi. I'm not making a qualitative assessment, it is what it is. Now,

according to the research below, if flavonoids are affected differently by

microwaving than they are by boiling, wouldn't it stand to reason that our

formulas would be affected?

 

According to the Bensky MM, Chen Pi has the flavonoids: hesperidin,

neohesperidin, tangeretin, and a bunch with long chemical names that I'm too

lazy to type. Bai Zhu however lists no flavonoids. If I write a formula to

resolve damp that contains those two herbs, would it not have a different

effect if I microwave (97% flavonoids lost*) vs boil (66% flavonoids lost)?

The classical literature generally teaches us the relationship between herbs

by relating them to boiled decoctions. We adulterate that knowledge when we

alter our methods. No one is suggesting that Chen Pi would fail to work if

microwaved, but would we need to change its ratio? Obviously no one knows,

but the answer is quite possibly yes. Now add 12 other herbs with varying

levels of flavonoids. What happens to our perfectly balanced formula? Now

further consider that just b/c we only have research on flavonoids doesn't

mean that other nutrients aren't also affected. Maybe so, maybe no, either

way it adds to uncertainty. Are we talking about qi? I don't know about

you, but I am.

 

I see the same problem in ground raw herbs. Most formulas not prescribed as

a honey pill are formulated based on a boiled decoction. When you destroy

plant fiber you increase the chance of releasing active constituents in

different ratios. Doesn't mean the formula won't work, but how do we dose

such a beast? Furthermore, highly starchy/fibrous plants will probably be

much more affected by this change than leave, flowers, etc that have less

ability to sequester their nutrients in dense fiber. In prescribing ground

raw I've found myself altering dosages based on my estimation of how the

herb state will affect the formula. I've commonly seen ren shen dosed this

way (lower dosage if ground).

 

 

* as a footnote, since none of us has seen the actual research regarding

microwaves and flavonoids, I list the percentage in my discussion merely as

a means to illustrate that some difference has been observed in research.

Clearly we should further investigate and take care not to firmly set a

specific flavonoid ratio as written in stone. It's more written in water at

this point.

 

Tim Sharpe

 

 

 

On Behalf Of Tim Sharpe

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 5:20 PM

 

RE: Re: Can Hertel be taken seriously?

 

From a speech entitled " Detoxification Update " at Boulderfest 2005, Bob

Rountree states: According to The Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry,

you lose 97% of flavonoids from cooking with microwave, boiling you lose 66%

of the flavonoids, if you steam you get minimal loss...

[Guest guest]

Tim,

 

I believe that on a forum such as this, opinions need to be supported

by evidence. Otherwise, best not to voice them. This is a discussion

forum concerning the practice of medicine after all.

 

I'll be out of town till next Tuesday. Good luck and best wishes to

everyone.

 

Bob

[Guest guest]

Thanks Sean, as I stated, I'm not sure the myrosinase activity info truly

applies to my microwaved flavonoids post. Pending sufficient gut flora

(which can't be assumed in most sick patients) we all innately have

myrosinase, and thus still benefit from brassica vegetables to a varying

degree regardless of cooking methodology. Flavonoids on the other hand,

once lost, don't magically revitalize. On listenting to the lecture, it

seems as though the Flavonoids comment was added as an aside wedged in

between other research on brassica. Also, the research you cite is from

2006, Bob's talk was in 2005. Great find though. If anyone uncovers more

please be sure to post.

 

 

 

-Tim

 

 

 

 

Sean Doherty

Wednesday, June 25, 2008 3:25 PM

 

 

 

The articles that I saw in the Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry

 

said that microwaving eliminated myrosinase activity after two minutes and

 

steaming eliminated it after seven. This was in brassica vegetables.

 

 

 

Here is a link .

 

 

 

http://pubs.acs.org/cgi-bin/abstract.cgi/jafcau/2006/54/i20/abs/jf0607314.ht

ml

 

 

 

Sean

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Bob,

 

 

 

So what is Dr. Roundtree's financial incentive in informing us about his

research on microwaves, which BTW I am sure, was more than an afternoon?

 

 

 

-Jason

 

 

 

 

 

_____

 

 

On Behalf Of Bob Flaws

Wednesday, June 25, 2008 12:13 PM

 

Re: Can Hertel be taken seriously?

 

 

 

By all means, let's see what Dr. Roundtree has to say about this

issue. However, in that process, let's also keep in mind that, as a

part and principal of Xymogen, Dr. Roundtree is a personally invested

proponent of a particular sub-set of Western medicine.

 

Why I say this: I personally don't care all that much about the actual

topic under discussion: microwave ovens, good or bad? What I'm

lobbying for is critical thinking and reading as medical

professionals. Judging the biases of an " authority " is just as

important to critical thinking and reading as are judging their

credentials. In other words, Dr. Roundtree is not a disinterested

medical scholar or researcher. Therefore, assessment of his point of

view must be tempered by that fact.

 

Pl-l-lease, this is not an attack or criticism of Bob. It most

emphatically is not. I respect Bob greatly. I am merely pointing

something out in terms of the standards of critical thinking and

reading. In fact, readers might want to Google " the principles and

practice of critical thinking " or something like that to understand

what I'm talking about.

 

As an extension of this, as an employee and principal of Blue Poppy

Enterprises, Inc., Bob Flaws is not a neutral and disinterested

medical scholar or researcher. Similarly, as a principal of Eastland

Press, Dan Bensky is not a neutral and disinterested medical scholar

and researcher. Same goes for Subhuti Dharmananda as a principal of

Seven Forests, Ted Kaptchuk as a principal of K'an, John Chen as a

principal of Evergreen Herbs/Lotus Seminars, John Scott as a principal

of Golden Flower, etc., etc., etc. When any of us or anyone else who

has a financial stake in a company selling goods and services to the

profession hold an opinion, there is the potential for a conflict of

interest and, therefore, a biased opinion. In such cases, readers of

that opinion should rightly question the " authority's " biases and

motives (which may or may not be neutral and above reproach). If one

does not question such potential conflicts of interests, then one is

not reading or thinking critically.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Bob,

 

 

 

I do not think that Tim ever suggested otherwise. He actually said, " I

wholeheartedly agree that we must maintain academic rigor when making

claims, citing ones sources etc. "

 

 

 

There have been plenty of sources cited.

 

 

 

-Jason

 

 

 

 

 

_____

 

 

On Behalf Of Bob Flaws

 

 

 

 

 

Tim,

 

I believe that on a forum such as this, opinions need to be supported

by evidence. Otherwise, best not to voice them. This is a discussion

forum concerning the practice of medicine after all.

 

I'll be out of town till next Tuesday. Good luck and best wishes to

everyone.

 

Bob

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

I think the question should be are microwave ovens potentially harmful and if so

as responsible physicians should we inform our patients against their use in

particular with warming medicinal teas?  Hertel's creditiblity or accuracy isn't

the issue in my book.  I agree with Jason regarding critical thinking.  I

benefited from a class on the subject that I had in college and I recall the 13

logical fallacies (quoted from Introduction to Logic by Irving M. Copi 6th ed.):

1) Argumentum ad Baculum (appeal to force) - when one appeals to force or the

threat of force to cause acceptance of a conclusion.

2) Argumentum ad Hominem (abusive) " argument directed to the man " - instead of

trying to disprobe the truth of what is asserted, one attacks the character of

the person who makes the assertion.  This is fallaciou, because the personal

character of a person is logically irrelevant to the truth or falsehood of what

the person says or the correctness or incorrectness of that person's argument.

3) Argumentum ad Hominem (circumstantial) - when one ignores the question of

whether their own view is true or false and seeks instead to prove that their

opponent(s) should accept their view because of special circumstances (i.e. a

cleargy could argue that their position should be accepted because its denial is

incompatible witht he Scriptures.)

4) Argumentum ad Ignorantiam (argument from ignorance) - arguing that something

is true (i.e. existence of ghosts) because no one else has been able to prove

there aren't any.

5) Argumentum ad Misericordiam (appeal to pity) - when pity is appealed to for

the sake of getting a conclusion accepted.

6) Argumentum ad Populum - directing an emotional appeal " to the people " or " to

the gallery " to win their assent to a conclusion unsupported by good evidence.

7) Argumentum ad Verecundiam (appeal to authority) - stating the fact that

because a particular individual is an acknowledged expert who has studied the

matter thoroughly that such and such a conclusion is correct because it is the

best judgement of such an expert authority.

8) Accident - treating a statement which in many connections is not misleading

as if it were true always and without qualification (i.e. in Plato's republic,

" one should pay one's debts " ... " suppose a friend when a friend who is in his

right mind has deposited wepons with someone and asks for them back when not in

their right mind, ought they to give them back to them?

9) Converse Accient (hasty generalization) - seeking to understand and

characterize all cases of a certin kind, one can usually pay attention to only

some of them.  But those examined should be typical rather than atypical.  A

fallicy occurs if one considers only unusual or atypical cases and hastily

generalizes to a rule that fits them alone. (i.e. a physician observes thta

administering an opiate alleviates the suffering of those who are seriously ill,

one may propose that narcotics be made available to everyone.

10) False Cause (non causa pro causa) - to mistake what is not the cause of a

given effect for its real cause.  (post hoc ego propter hoc) - the inferecne

that one event is the cause of another from the mere fact that the first occurs

earlier than the second.

11) Petitio Principii (begging the question) - In attemptin to establish the

truth of a proposition, one often casts about for acceptable premisses from

which the proposition in question can be deduced as conclusion.  When the

proposition and conclusion are essentially stating the same thing essentially

this is circular argument. (i.e. Shakespeare is a better writer than Robbins

because people with good taste in literature prefer Shakespeare.  And if asked

how one tells who has good taste in literature, one might reply that such

persons are to identifed by their preffering Shakespere to Robbins.

12) Complex Question - " Have you given up your evil ways? "   If answer No then

you it implies that you have had and are still having evil ways.  If answer Yes

then it implies that you had previously had evil ways.

13) Ignoration Elenchi (irrelevant conclusion) when an argument purporting to

establish a particular conclusion is directed to proving a different

conclusion.  (i.e. You should vote for this proposition because presumably

everyone agrees that decent housing fo all people is desireable.  The queston

is, will this particular measure provide it.

 

In the scientific method: Observation, hypothesis, experimental testing,

Conclusion (analysis of data).  Frequently it is failure to reject the null

hypothesis that tends to lend creditability to a particular hypothesis until

further experimental evidence refutes that hypothesis.  Science rarely is

proving anything instead it attempts to objectively see if it fails to disprove

that something.  That is how science works!

 

Part of our duty as physicians charged with the task of reporting to our

patients in a responsible & accurate fasion so as to advise them within our

scope of practice as to their medical options in their best interest of their

health.

 

To do so affectively one method (that embraced by Western medicine) is the

evidence based medicine model.  If using this model we need to become proficient

at accurately and affectively analyze the scientific research to take into

consideration the above mention logical fallacies as well as to scrutinize

limitations and possible sources of error of the experimental process or

clinical study.  (i.e. these recent " sham acupuncture studies " why are they

achieving statistically significant results compared with the test acupuncture?)

Many people jump to the conclusion that it doesn't matter where you put the

needles!  Is this an accurate conclusion or perhaps their may be some

therapeutic value to the sham acupuncture protocol.  Another fallacy is to

presume that one could use this sham acupuncture protocol to treat an other

medical condition.  Who know's maybe it is a cure all point prescription and

nobody knows it?  One point being, we have to consider the plausability of as

many reasonable possibilites as we can come up with.  And, remember that we are

not saying that it is a fact but, instead are concluding that based on a

statistical analysis of the data we are agreeing with their conclusion of

failing to reject the null hypothesis (which tends to support the cause and

affect relationship between the therapeutic method).

 

As for microwave ovens action on food and its affect on ones health.  My

girlfriend who previously lived in Norway brought to my attention that much of

Europe doesn't use the microwave anymore for health concern reasons.  And, she

has provided me in the past with several articles that failed to reject that

hypothesis.  Many of them provided scientific information on the alteration of

chemical bonds, converting certain trans-amino acids into their synthetic

cis-isomers. 

One such article published by Dr. Lita Lee in the December 9, 1989 Lancet

mentioned that heating the baby's milk bottle in the microwave the amino acid

L-proline, was converted to its d-isomer, which is known to be neurotoxic

(poisonous to the nervous system) and nephrotoxic (poisonous to the kidneys).

 

I keep an objective mind when I read this stuff (and my background is in

biochemisty from UCSD where I had to read and scrutinize over a hundred

scientific papers) and thanks to my girlfriend who is also an acupuncturist, we

recommend to our patients that they don't use microwave ovens at all.  It isn't

the risk of ionizing radiation but, the affect of the oscillation of the

electromagenitic (EM) field which interacts with the negative & positive charges

on the molecules (particularly the di-polar water molecule) which causes these

molecules to flip back in forth in accordance with the oscillations of the

microwave EM field.  This results in friction between the molecules which

produces heat.  As we all know, heat can cause molecules to undergo chemical

reactions for example the breaking of double bounds in C=C compounds.  Have you

ever noticed what happens when you put a piece of fresh french bread in the

microwave oven.  If you put it in

there for more than a few seconds it gets hard and doesn't taste good. 

Obviously, it has undergone some sort of transformation presumably chemical to

achieve an altered state.  Try it for yourself if you don't believe me.

 

But, don't take my word for it that would be argumentum ad verecundiam.  Do your

own literature research and draw your own conclusions.  I could be a crack pot

for all you know!

As for conflict of interest possiblities I disclose that I have nothing to

benefit financially, politically or otherwise with regards to the use of

microwave ovens other than my interest as a discerning & consciencous health

care professional.

 

 

--- On Wed, 6/25/08, wrote:

 

 

RE: Re: Can Hertel be taken seriously?

 

Wednesday, June 25, 2008, 5:12 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bob,

 

So what is Dr. Roundtree's financial incentive in informing us about his

research on microwaves, which BTW I am sure, was more than an afternoon?

 

-Jason

 

_____

 

 

[] On Behalf Of Bob Flaws

Wednesday, June 25, 2008 12:13 PM

 

Re: Can Hertel be taken seriously?

 

By all means, let's see what Dr. Roundtree has to say about this

issue. However, in that process, let's also keep in mind that, as a

part and principal of Xymogen, Dr. Roundtree is a personally invested

proponent of a particular sub-set of Western medicine.

 

Why I say this: I personally don't care all that much about the actual

topic under discussion: microwave ovens, good or bad? What I'm

lobbying for is critical thinking and reading as medical

professionals. Judging the biases of an " authority " is just as

important to critical thinking and reading as are judging their

credentials. In other words, Dr. Roundtree is not a disinterested

medical scholar or researcher. Therefore, assessment of his point of

view must be tempered by that fact.

 

Pl-l-lease, this is not an attack or criticism of Bob. It most

emphatically is not. I respect Bob greatly. I am merely pointing

something out in terms of the standards of critical thinking and

reading. In fact, readers might want to Google " the principles and

practice of critical thinking " or something like that to understand

what I'm talking about.

 

As an extension of this, as an employee and principal of Blue Poppy

Enterprises, Inc., Bob Flaws is not a neutral and disinterested

medical scholar or researcher. Similarly, as a principal of Eastland

Press, Dan Bensky is not a neutral and disinterested medical scholar

and researcher. Same goes for Subhuti Dharmananda as a principal of

Seven Forests, Ted Kaptchuk as a principal of K'an, John Chen as a

principal of Evergreen Herbs/Lotus Seminars, John Scott as a principal

of Golden Flower, etc., etc., etc. When any of us or anyone else who

has a financial stake in a company selling goods and services to the

profession hold an opinion, there is the potential for a conflict of

interest and, therefore, a biased opinion. In such cases, readers of

that opinion should rightly question the " authority's " biases and

motives (which may or may not be neutral and above reproach). If one

does not question such potential conflicts of interests, then one is

not reading or thinking critically.

 

 

[Guest guest]

I believe that Bob is a true-believer in a certain sub-set of Western

medicine (just as you and I are true-believers in CM. I've been

trying to come up with a name for that sub-set, but haven't so far.

Perhaps call it the Townsend Letter sub-set.) And I think concern

over things like microwave ovens goes along with that sub-set's

general concerns and mindset. Further, as a principal in Xymogen, Bob

is no longer a financially disinterested promoter of that sub-set.

 

That's all I was saying. Sorry, I'm not clearer about this. I have

yet to find the exact words to characterize the movement within

Western medicine of which I think Bob is a leading proponent. Is the

term environmental medicine applicable? Or ecological medicine? You

tell me. Of course, Bob is a believer in and proponent of

orthomolecular medicine. My point is, once one believes certain

things, then other beliefs are more easily and commonly held. One

becomes predisposed to accept certain beliefs and certain types of

evidence for those beliefs.

 

I guess I'm not being very clear about this because this is the first

time that I have tried to articulate these ideas. Since this all may

not be terribly important, perhaps we should leave it as is. Bottom

line, I respect Bob as a doctor very much. All I was ever suggesting

was that one has to look at who is saying what and why they might be

saying what they are saying.

 

Bob

[Guest guest]

LMAO! I'm so sorry.. can't let this one go. I couldn't possibly

imagine what would happen to my body chemistry if I was locked up with

7 vegetarians in a hotel room for 2 months. It would make 'supersize

me' look like jane fonda's workout. But then, I would probably have

crawled into that microwave after 2 days.

Geoff

 

 

, " "

< wrote:

>

> Hi Roger,

>

> http://tinyurl.com/62x4wx says: " Hans Hertel ... and seven fellow

> vegetarians confined themselves to a hotel for two months in the late

> 1980s. There, they consumed milk and vegetables prepared in the

> microwave oven and in other ways.

>

> Hertel emerged with an astonishing pronouncement. Eating microwaved

> milk and vegetables caused changes in the men's blood that " appear to

> indicate the initial stage of a pathological process such as occurs

> at the start of a cancerous condition. "

[Guest guest]

Bob,

 

I think you're actually quite clear in the point you are making. It is

about evaluating claims directly and objectively, while attempting to

avoid pre-ordained conclusions based on personal bias. Also it is

about avoiding the pitfall of quoting authorities without evaluating

the source of their information. Easier said than done sometimes, but

important nonetheless.

 

Personally, I won't ever eat microwaved foods. That is based on my gut

instinct about it, not on any science. There is always the possibility

that unique carcinogenic compounds are formed by this type of cooking.

I have no evidence for this, but I have made a personal choice to

avoid the foods and exposure to the machines. In my past experience,

these gut instincts have helped me avoid dangerous substances that

were originally believed to be safe and years later found to be

harmful. However, these are simply gut instincts and don't constitute

evidence, and when entering into a discussion, these beliefs need to

be disclosed as subjective feelings and nothing more.

 

I also think Bob Rountree is an incredible healer and teacher, but I

was unable to confirm the flavonoid info attributed to him (if in fact

he actually said those things!). All the research I have seen

indicates that microwave cooking has no more of an adverse effect on

nutrients than other forms of cooking. In fact, boiling depletes

nutrients the most, and char grilling creates the most dangerous

(known) carcinogenic compounds.

 

Does this convince me to eat microwaved food? No. I'm following my

instincts on this one, that there may be some as yet undiscovered

danger to this cooking method. But this personal belief does not

constitute evidence, so it only gives me the right to express it as a

personal belief, not a fact.

 

- Bill Schoenbart

 

 

 

 

 

, " Bob Flaws "

<pemachophel2001 wrote:

>

> I believe that Bob is a true-believer in a certain sub-set of Western

> medicine (just as you and I are true-believers in CM. I've been

> trying to come up with a name for that sub-set, but haven't so far.

> Perhaps call it the Townsend Letter sub-set.) And I think concern

> over things like microwave ovens goes along with that sub-set's

> general concerns and mindset. Further, as a principal in Xymogen, Bob

> is no longer a financially disinterested promoter of that sub-set.

>

> That's all I was saying. Sorry, I'm not clearer about this. I have

> yet to find the exact words to characterize the movement within

> Western medicine of which I think Bob is a leading proponent. Is the

> term environmental medicine applicable? Or ecological medicine? You

> tell me. Of course, Bob is a believer in and proponent of

> orthomolecular medicine. My point is, once one believes certain

> things, then other beliefs are more easily and commonly held. One

> becomes predisposed to accept certain beliefs and certain types of

> evidence for those beliefs.

>

> I guess I'm not being very clear about this because this is the first

> time that I have tried to articulate these ideas. Since this all may

> not be terribly important, perhaps we should leave it as is. Bottom

> line, I respect Bob as a doctor very much. All I was ever suggesting

> was that one has to look at who is saying what and why they might be

> saying what they are saying.

>

> Bob

>

[Guest guest]

Steve

All cooking alter proteins, look at a boiled egg. The question is what

do we know about the affects on humans. Bob is correct in saying that

a general world view can bias ones assessment of the same evidence.

Techofobes dont need much evidence to believe technology is harmful.

But for example is a BBK steak better for you that microwaved steak?

 

 

 

400 29th St. Suite 419

Oakland Ca 94609

 

 

 

alonmarcus

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

effects.

one's

technophobes.

BBQ

than

 

....and so on.

 

From the precision/concision police.

 

On Jun 26, 2008, at 1:51 PM, alon marcus wrote:

 

> Steve

> All cooking alter proteins, look at a boiled egg. The question is what

> do we know about the affects on humans. Bob is correct in saying that

> a general world view can bias ones assessment of the same evidence.

> Techofobes dont need much evidence to believe technology is harmful.

> But for example is a BBK steak better for you that microwaved steak?

>

>

>

> 400 29th St. Suite 419

> Oakland Ca 94609

>

>

>

> alonmarcus

>

>

[Guest guest]

I think we're taking things a bit far at this point. I have Bob ON TAPE. I

listened to it to confirm as I posted. The audio and printed info is

available for sale through Crayhon Research, which is where I purchased only

the audio. I provided the name of the speech and when and where it

occurred. I even provided the source journal of Bob's comment. The only

issue at this point is what does that research actually say? Without a more

specific citation we are at a standstill.

 

 

 

As so often happens on this list, we become mired in semantics and clinical

reality gets tossed in the can. Let's look at what we know. We have

rumored evidence of flavonoid alterations. We are able to witness

ourselves, as mentioned in Bill's post, the structural changes in bread that

is microwaved. Many of us, myself included, have read research indicating

differing nutrient loss rates pending cooking method (boiled, steamed,

fried, grilled, etc) Those studies are reported via regular media outlets.

We have at the very least reason to suspect that microwaved foodstuffs may

be different in some way than boiled foodstuffs. This in all likelihood

will to varying degrees change the balance of herb formulas as discussed in

my earlier post. Using herbs in a non-traditional way IMHO equates to

experimenting on our patients. Many of us do this all the time when we

combine Wx and Chinese herbs, or supplements with herbs. I myself do it,

but let's call a spade a spade. It is understood in those instances that we

are varying from the millennia of herbal knowledge that is our training.

Can we for a moment consider whether we might need to be concerned with the

clinical realities of using microwaves. Then progress to the nature and

extent of that concern. I don't want to completely rehash my earlier post

on this topic relating to raw herb powders, let me just say that this may be

a big deal for some herbs, especially flavonoid rich citrus varieties.

 

 

 

-Tim Sharpe

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

bill_schoenbart

 

Thursday, June 26, 2008 11:23 AM

 

 

 

Re: Can Hertel be taken seriously?

 

 

 

I was unable to confirm the flavonoid info attributed to him (if in fact

 

he actually said those things!).