Re: Grains at the root of NIDDM and the diseases of civilization
Gantlet
"Susan" <neve...@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:5i9e9eF...@mid.individual.net...
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> http://content.karger.com/ProdukteDB/produkte.asp?Aktion=ShowPDF&ProduktNr=223543&ArtikelNr=59680&filename=.pdf
>
>
> ............................
> Evolutionary Aspects of Nutrition and Health
> Diet, Exercise, Genetics and Chronic Disease
> ..
> ............................
> World Review of Nutrition
> and Dietetics
> Vol. 84
> Series Editors Artemis P. Simopoulos
> The Center for Genetics, Nutrition and Health,
> Washington, D.C.
>
>
>
> Susan
I like how they attacked whole grains and made a list of how grains lack
nutrients.
For the matter they can even say the same thing about fruits and veggies.
you can live very healthy on whole grains alone.
They said nothing about fats lack of nutrients and that a diet of nothing
but protien will kill you real quick.
its also from 1999
Tom
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> convicted neighbor "Susan" <neve...@nomail.com> wrote:
> >
> > http://content.karger.com/ProdukteDB/produkte.asp?Aktion=ShowPDF&ProduktNr=223543&ArtikelNr=59680&filename=.pdf
> >
> > ............................
> > Evolutionary Aspects of Nutrition and Health
> > Diet, Exercise, Genetics and Chronic Disease
> > ..
> > ............................
> > World Review of Nutrition
> > and Dietetics
> > Vol. 84
> > Series Editors Artemis P. Simopoulos
> > The Center for Genetics, Nutrition and Health,
> > Washington, D.C.
> >
> > Susan
>
> I like how they attacked whole grains and made a list of how grains lack
> nutrients.
> For the matter they can even say the same thing about fruits and veggies.
> you can live very healthy on whole grains alone.
Correct.
> They said nothing about fats lack of nutrients and that a diet of nothing
> but protien will kill you real quick.
It remains wiser to have variety of different food groups in each meal
while understanding that without glucose the brain would cease normal
function.
> its also from 1999
Moreover, Darwin's theory of evolution as posited in his book, The
Origin of Species, is dead.
No new species have emerged as predicted by this theory.
A theory requires support by successful predictions to keep it viable.
Be hungry... be healthy... be blessed:
http://TheWellnessFoundation.com/PressRelease
Prayerfully in Jesus' awesome love,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Cardiologist
Kurt
> Gantlet wrote:
> > I like how they attacked whole grains and made a list of how grains lack
> > nutrients.
>
>
> > For the matter they can even say the same thing about fruits and veggies.
> > you can live very healthy on whole grains alone.
>
> saving antioxidants. Grains are calorie dense with lots of oxidants and
> little nutrient density.
Not true if you're talking about "whole" grains. The antioxidants in
whole grains are in the germ and the bran of a grain. As far as
nutrients, whole grains are a good source of Vitamin B, Vitamin E,
magnesium, iron and fiber as well as other valuable antioxidants not
found in some fruits and vegetables.
But don't take my word for it...GIYF.
Kurt
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Correct.
Jim Chinnis
>You'd die without
>fat or protein but live a very long life without dietary carbs.
True.
>I don't think 1999 was a bad year for looking back at evolutionary
>changes, but what do I know? ROFL.
ROFL is right.
--
Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA
Gantlet
> whole grains are in the germ and the bran of a grain. As far as
> nutrients, whole grains are a good source of Vitamin B, Vitamin E,
> magnesium, iron and fiber as well as other valuable antioxidants not
> found in some fruits and vegetables.
>
> But don't take my word for it...GIYF.
>
> Kurt
>
> whole grains are in the germ and the bran of a grain. As far as
> nutrients, whole grains are a good source of Vitamin B, Vitamin E,
> magnesium, iron and fiber as well as other valuable antioxidants not
> found in some fruits and vegetables.
>
> But don't take my word for it...GIYF.
>
> Kurt
>
> whole grains are in the germ and the bran of a grain. As far as
> nutrients, whole grains are a good source of Vitamin B, Vitamin E,
> magnesium, iron and fiber as well as other valuable antioxidants not
> found in some fruits and vegetables.
>
> But don't take my word for it...GIYF.
>
> Kurt
>
Jackie Patti
> Corn, for instance, has
> almost twice the antioxidant activity of apples, while wheat and oats
> almost equal broccoli and spinach in antioxidant activity.
I can eat an AWFUL lot of broccoli and spinach for the same carb count
as a small serving of wheat or oats.
Wheat and oats is what I fed my chickens when we raised them (they also
free-ranged so got lotsa greens and bugs too). I didn't eat the wheat
and oats, I ate the eggs!
One of the things that bugs me with the "whole grains" thing is that the
studies were done on whole grains, but are used to justify selling
products made from milled grains. Bread is not a whole grain, you can
walk through any number of fields and never see bread growing! I think
very few of the grain-supporting-contingent actually eat whole grains,
except maybe some corn.
I do cook whole grains for my non-diabetic hubby now and then; they make
great cereals in winter. And they're easy too - I do them overnight in
a crockpot with a sliced apple, a handful of raisins and a touch of
blackstrap molasses. I usually do wheat berries, brown rice, barley or
hulled oats this way. This is *real* whole grains, unlike Cheerios.
And it's yummy stuff, but I can't do more than just a taste without
losing bg control myself.
IMO, one of the advantages of a non-diabetic spouse is that you get to
have tastes of things. I can eat one french fry if they're on his
plate. ;)
johnniemccoy@
"Susan" <neve...@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:5i9e9eF...@mid.individual.net...
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> http://content.karger.com/ProdukteDB/produkte.asp?Aktion=ShowPDF&ProduktNr=223543&ArtikelNr=59680&filename=.pdf
>
>
That's why I like cows.
John
Ozgirl
"Jackie Patti" <jpa...@ccil.org> wrote in message
news:46bfd8ba$0$22483$470e...@news.pa.net...
Right on Jacki. Barley is wonderful in soups for one example. That thing
they call bread is just that, a thing. Brown rice spikes me so it is poor
value for the bg buck for me.
KC
> IMO, one of the advantages of a non-diabetic spouse is that you get to
> have tastes of things. I can eat one french fry if they're on his plate.
> ;)
>
> --
I have tastes of my kids foods too. It is nice to be able to just have a
taste of some things.
KC
Nicky
wrote:
>Gantlet wrote:
>> Corn, for instance, has
>> almost twice the antioxidant activity of apples, while wheat and oats
>> almost equal broccoli and spinach in antioxidant activity.
Uh, guys - this is not Tom using long words like "instance", in a
message that's punctuated correctly - waste of time arguing unless the
person he's cut-and-pasting shows up...
Nicky.
T2 dx 05/04 + underactive thyroid
D&E, 100ug thyroxine
Last A1c 5.6% BMI 25
Alan S
<ukc802...@btconnect.com> wrote:
>
>>Gantlet wrote:
>>> Corn, for instance, has
>>> almost twice the antioxidant activity of apples, while wheat and oats
>>> almost equal broccoli and spinach in antioxidant activity.
>
>Uh, guys - this is not Tom using long words like "instance", in a
>message that's punctuated correctly - waste of time arguing unless the
>person he's cut-and-pasting shows up...
Try this page:
http://www.wholegrainscouncil.org/research.htm
Gee, where have we seen some of these words before:
"Whole Grains High In Antioxidants
Dr. Riu Hai Liu of Cornell and his colleagues discovered
that whole grains contain protective antioxidants in
quantities rivalling or exceeding those in fruits and
vegetables. Corn, for instance, has almost twice the
antioxidant activity of apples, while wheat and oats almost
equal broccoli and spinach in antioxidant activity. Abstract
here. Download graphic illustration in PPT.
Journal of Agric. & Food Chem., Feb 2005; vol
53(6):2297-2306"
So, I wonder who owns that web-page? Here is the "Whole
Grains Council" board:
Board of Directors
Chairman: Bob Brown, Frito-Lay
Past Chair: Jeff Dahlberg, National Sorghum Producers
Vice Chair: Michael Bittel, King Arthur Flour
Secretary-Treasurer: K. Dun Gifford, Oldways
Director: Linh Bui, Masterfoods USA
Director: Sara Baer-Sinnott, Oldways
Director: Mike Holleman, Indian Harvest Specialtifoods
Director: Karen Wilder, Schwan Foods
Say no more.
Tom's word for the day:
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?sourceid=Mozilla-search&va=plagiarism
plagiarism
One entry found for plagiarism.
Main Entry: pla·gia·rism
Pronunciation: 'plA-j&-"ri-z&m also -jE-&-
Function: noun
1 : an act or instance of plagiarizing
2 : something plagiarized
- pla·gia·rist /-rist/ noun
- pla·gia·ris·tic /"plA-j&-'ris-tik also -jE-&-/ adjective
Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia.
d&e, metformin 1500mg, ezetrol 10mg
Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter.
--
http://loraltraveloz.blogspot.com/
latest: Mossman Gorge in the Daintree Rainforest
http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/
latest: Self-Testing and Type 2 Management
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> "Jackie Patti" <jpa...@ccil.org> wrote:
>
> > IMO, one of the advantages of a non-diabetic spouse is that you get to
> > have tastes of things. I can eat one french fry if they're on his plate.
> > ;)
> >
>
> taste of some things.
>
> KC
Tasting things that are good makes us wonderfully hungrier :-)
Jim Chinnis
>folks I know in the Dakotas who grew up grain farming
>assure me that there's a lot of chopped up animals mixed in the grain
>during the harvesting process, all the critters living in the fields.
So, you're saying grain isn't all bad, huh?
Gantlet
>> Corn, for instance, has
>> almost twice the antioxidant activity of apples, while wheat and oats
>> almost equal broccoli and spinach in antioxidant activity.
>
> I can eat an AWFUL lot of broccoli and spinach for the same carb count as
> a small serving of wheat or oats.
the difference between the 2 diets is not really in that low carbers eat
more broccoli
or that those on low fat do not eat broccoli and other veggies.
the real difference is Fat vs Whole Grain.
fruits and veggies are carbs - for me that means I get about 130 carbs a day
from just fruits and veggies
thats more than many low carbers eat.
>
> Wheat and oats is what I fed my chickens when we raised them (they also
> free-ranged so got lotsa greens and bugs too). I didn't eat the wheat and
> oats, I ate the eggs!
was that also before you became diabetic? what would you say you diet was
like
in those heavenly care free days before diabetes.
>
> One of the things that bugs me with the "whole grains" thing is that the
> studies were done on whole grains, but are used to justify selling
> products made from milled grains. Bread is not a whole grain, you can
> walk through any number of fields and never see bread growing! I think
> very few of the grain-supporting-contingent actually eat whole grains,
> except maybe some corn.
of course bread is not the wisest choice and is far from what places like
the ADA recommend.
>
> I do cook whole grains for my non-diabetic hubby now and then; they make
> great cereals in winter. And they're easy too - I do them overnight in a
> crockpot with a sliced apple, a handful of raisins and a touch of
> blackstrap molasses. I usually do wheat berries, brown rice, barley or
> hulled oats this way. This is *real* whole grains, unlike Cheerios. And
> it's yummy stuff, but I can't do more than just a taste without losing bg
> control myself.
i stopped cooking oat meal in the slow cooker and prefer it to be less
mushy.
I now cook the steel cuts oats on the stove top.
>
> IMO, one of the advantages of a non-diabetic spouse is that you get to
> have tastes of things. I can eat one french fry if they're on his plate.
> ;)
for me whole grains = about 15 carbs, that is like having a taste when
compared to
the amount of rice and bread I would have in the pre diagnosed days.
Tom
Gantlet
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> Gantlet wrote:
>
>> the difference between the 2 diets is not really in that low carbers eat
>> more broccoli
>> or that those on low fat do not eat broccoli and other veggies.
>> the real difference is Fat vs Whole Grain.
>> fruits and veggies are carbs - for me that means I get about 130 carbs a
>> day from just fruits and veggies
>> thats more than many low carbers eat.
>
>
> You must be getting all your carbs from sugary fruits and not higher
> fiber, low glycemic veggies like low carbers do.
I divide my 200 carbs a day by 3 - whole grains, Fruits and Veggies..
posted below is what the ADA does say about food groups and that is what I
try to follow.
I would have to eat a hell of a lot of broccoli to get the amount of fiber
in
1/2 cup of my bran cereal.
1/2 my bran cereal = 13 grams of fiber
6 cups of broccoli = about 12 grams of fiber.
even the newest newbie knows its hard to get the recommended amounts of
fiber on low carb
with out taking supplements.
not to mention things like Potassium and Calcium.
I am not against any one choosing a low carb diet but I do see things that
just do not seem true.
I would speak out against people in favor of low fat if i seen them posting
in the same manner.
Newbies should be given the truth.
>
>
>
>> of course bread is not the wisest choice and is far from what places like
>> the ADA recommend.
>
> The ADA *specifically* recommends high starchy consumption on their web
> site.
its best to find out what places like the ADA do say instead of hearing it
from others.
here is what the ADA does say.
Read the link or read what's below
http://www.diabetes.org/nutrition-and-recipes/nutrition/healthyfoodchoices.jsp
Knowing what to eat can be confusing. Everywhere you turn, there is news
about what is or isn't good for you. Some basic principles have weathered
the fad diets, and have stood the test of time. Here are a few tips on
making healthful food choices for you and your entire family.
a.. Eat lots of vegetables and fruits. Try picking from the rainbow of
colors available to maximize variety. Eat non-starchy vegetables such as
spinach, carrots, broccoli or green beans with meals.
b.. Choose whole grain foods over processed grain products. Try brown rice
with your stir fry or whole wheat spaghetti with your favorite pasta sauce.
c.. Include dried beans (like kidney or pinto beans) and lentils into your
meals.
d.. Include fish in your meals 2-3 times a week.
e.. Choose lean meats like cuts of beef and pork that end in "loin" such
as pork loin and sirloin. Remove the skin from chicken and turkey.
f.. Choose non-fat dairy such as skim milk, non-fat yogurt and non-fat
cheese.
g.. Choose water and calorie-free "diet" drinks instead of regular soda,
fruit punch, sweet tea and other sugar-sweetened drinks.
h.. Choose liquid oils for cooking instead of solid fats that can be high
in saturated and trans fats. Remember that fats are high in calories. If
you're trying to lose weight, watch your portion sizes of added fats.
i.. Cut back on high calorie snack foods and desserts like chips, cookies,
cakes, and full-fat ice cream.
j.. Eating too much of even healthful foods can lead to weight gain. Watch
your portion sizes.
Want more information on foods that are healthier, or how to establish a
plan for eating healthy foods? Let the American Diabetes Association help
point you in the right direction.
Diabetes meal plans & a healthy diet
Whether you need to lose weight, gain weight, or stay where you are, your
meal plan can help. A healthy diet is a way of eating that reduces risk
for complications such as heart disease and stroke.
Diabetes Food Pyramid Guide
The Food Guide Pyramid divides food into 6 food groups and emphasizes eating
a certain number of portions from each food group.
Rate Your Plate
A fun way to make sure you eat a variety of healthy foods at each meal.
Exchange Lists
Exchanges lists group together foods that have similar carbohydrate,
protein, fat, and calories. They can be a great guide to planning balanced
meals.
Holiday Meal Planning
The holidays can be a tough time for families, especially families dealing
with diabetes. But there's no reason you can't take it all in stride. With a
little preparation and some diabetes know-how under your belt, you'll be
ready to face any holiday head-on.
in truth what it comes down to is Whole Grains vs. Fat.
for some reason they like to make it seem like its Whole Grains vs. Veggies.
Maybe they don't realize that and maybe they do
but say something completely different. I don't know. What does it look
like to you?
Jim Chinnis
> a.. Eat lots of vegetables and fruits. Try picking from the rainbow of
>colors available to maximize variety. Eat non-starchy vegetables such as
>spinach, carrots, broccoli or green beans with meals.
Good advice.
> b.. Choose whole grain foods over processed grain products. Try brown rice
>with your stir fry or whole wheat spaghetti with your favorite pasta sauce.
Whole wheat sphaghetti is a processed grain product. The advice is
inconsistent.
> c.. Include dried beans (like kidney or pinto beans) and lentils into your
>meals.
OK.
> d.. Include fish in your meals 2-3 times a week.
Good, if fish species are chosen wisely.
> e.. Choose lean meats like cuts of beef and pork that end in "loin" such
>as pork loin and sirloin. Remove the skin from chicken and turkey.
Most such meats are from feedlots or factory farms and have distorted lipid
profiles, among other things. Naturally-raised meats (any cuts) would be
preferable. There's no evidence that leaner cuts from natually-raised
animals are healthier than fattier cuts.
> f.. Choose non-fat dairy such as skim milk, non-fat yogurt and non-fat
>cheese.
Evidence seems to support the healthfulness of full-fat cheeses, I don't
know what basis they have for recommending low fat cheese only. I've also
seen reports that consumption of skim milk rather than whole milk is a risk
for obesity.
> g.. Choose water and calorie-free "diet" drinks instead of regular soda,
>fruit punch, sweet tea and other sugar-sweetened drinks.
Recent evidence is that "diet" drinks are worse for obesity than "regular."
> h.. Choose liquid oils for cooking instead of solid fats that can be high
>in saturated and trans fats. Remember that fats are high in calories. If
>you're trying to lose weight, watch your portion sizes of added fats.
Recent evidence is that low-fat foods lead to obesity more than regular
foods do.
> i.. Cut back on high calorie snack foods and desserts like chips, cookies,
>cakes, and full-fat ice cream.
You should eliminate all processed foods. The only food on the list that
should be acceptable on occasion might be the full-fat ice cream.
> j.. Eating too much of even healthful foods can lead to weight gain. Watch
>your portion sizes.
OK.
Tim Shoppa
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> http://content.karger.com/ProdukteDB/produkte.asp?Aktion=ShowPDF&Prod...
>
> ............................
> Evolutionary Aspects of Nutrition and Health
> Diet, Exercise, Genetics and Chronic Disease
> ..
> ............................
> World Review of Nutrition
> and Dietetics
> Vol. 84
> Series Editors Artemis P. Simopoulos
> The Center for Genetics, Nutrition and Health,
> Washington, D.C.
>
> Susan
Not sure where this is going... I very pointedly asked here a few
months ago if any diabetics believed that carbs had caused their
diabetes. A few replied that yes, they believed that carbs were
responsible for their diabetes, and a few replied the other way that
no, carbs were not responsible.
I was prompted to ask that question by this excerpt from an article
quoted (well, mocked is perhaps a better term) by Ozgirl in May:
Of note, there is little evidence that total
carbohydrate intake is associated with the
development of type 2 diabetes (30,70,73,74).
Rather, a stronger association has been
observed between total fat and saturated
fat intake and type 2 diabetes (75,76),
although not all findings are in agreement
(30). Additionally, two prospective cohort
studies have shown no risk of diabetes
from consuming increased amounts of sugar
(74,77), and in one study, a negative
association was observed between sucrose
intake and diabetes risk (72). Intakes of both
whole grains (72,78) and dietary fiber (in
particular, cereal fiber) are associated with
lower risk of type 2 diabetes (30,70-72).
The original article referenced by Ozgirl is at
http://care.diabetesjournals.org/cgi/content/full/27/9/2266
Tim.
Jackie Patti
> the difference between the 2 diets is not really in that low carbers eat
> more broccoli
> or that those on low fat do not eat broccoli and other veggies.
> the real difference is Fat vs Whole Grain.
> fruits and veggies are carbs - for me that means I get about 130 carbs a day
> from just fruits and veggies
> thats more than many low carbers eat.
That may be true for you, Gantlet. But I do not think most people doing
low-fat eat 130g of carb in fruit and veggies. Most are more likely to
get their carbs in bagels, pasta and sugar.
My SIL is the only person I know personally doing low-fat in a way that
includes lots of fresh produce. I have more in common with her than I
do with any of my other family members - that we use different salad
dressings isn't nearly as different than the similarity that we both eat
large salads every day.
And that brings up a very good point, in that I think eating large doses
of fresh produce is much more important to health overall than the
macronutrient content of the diet.
Look at a big bowl of mixed salad vegetables as an example. Those
veggies have very few calories, so they don't count much towards
macronutrient percentages. The dressing has most of the calories so
determines the macronutrient breakdown. My SIL would tend to put a
sweeter, low-fat dressing on it, so her salad would be a "low fat" meal.
I would tend to put a dairy-based dressing on it, so my salad would be
a "low carb" meal. The rest of our family would tend to skip the salad
and eat something else instead. I don't think whether they'd eat a
burger or potatoes is nearly as significant as the fact that they
skipped the salad.
>> Wheat and oats is what I fed my chickens when we raised them (they also
>> free-ranged so got lotsa greens and bugs too). I didn't eat the wheat and
>> oats, I ate the eggs!
>
> was that also before you became diabetic? what would you say you diet was
> like
> in those heavenly care free days before diabetes.
No, we did not have chickens before I was diabetic, we've only lived in
the country for 5-6 years now. It was two decades ago that I was first
diagnosed.
I can remember individual things I ate, but not my overall diet as it's
simply too far back. And I was busy raising a baby and being in college
and paid almost no attention to diet except for the cost of groceries.
I know there was much less produce in my diet as we were very poor.
Most fruits and veggies were canned or frozen as that's a lot cheaper
than fresh.
I was in college as a single mom, so there's things like fasting for 6-8
days at a time in order to have enough to feed my daughter that occured
periodically.
I know we didn't eat much sugar, cause I cooked mostly from scratch,
cause I couldn't afford prepared foods much. Typical desserts for us
were things like rice pudding or gingerbread, both made from scratch.
Rice and flour are very cheap calories. But I didn't have a lot of time
for cooking, between school and parenting, so desserts just didn't
happen much.
We also did not eat nearly as much dairy as now as it was too expensive
- I just bought a gallon of milk a week for my daughter. Yogurt, hard
cheese and cottage cheese were much rarer whereas now they're every day
menu items.
A typical thing I did at least monthly was cook a turkey, because it was
so cheap and a big time-saver. I'd roast a turkey on the weekend, and
layer it in a tupperware with stuffing, potatoes and gravy. That way I
could cut off slices and nuke with frozen veggies for meals during the
week. We'd eat this for over a week every month.
We did lots of casseroles - I could get an insane number of meals out of
a single chicken. A typical recipe was a lb of noodles, a cup of
chicken, a 1 lb package of frozen veggies, and a sauce made from milk
and corn starch.
And a lot of hamburger-helper-type dishes, but with ground turkey
instead, as that was dead cheap back then . It's more expensive now as
it's become popular with the low-fat emphasis, but back then you could
get it dirt cheap. I could make a HUGE pot of something to feed us for
days out of only a pound of turkey.
I also know there are certain foods I shall never eat again because we
overdid them then. Plain spaghetti is one - I can handle other pasta
shapes, but not the one that. I shall also never eat bologna or hot
dogs again for the same reason. But nothing is as bad as boxed macaroni
and cheese, no degree of politeness could ever get me to eat even a
single bite of that again.
>> One of the things that bugs me with the "whole grains" thing is that the
>> studies were done on whole grains, but are used to justify selling
>> products made from milled grains. Bread is not a whole grain, you can
>> walk through any number of fields and never see bread growing! I think
>> very few of the grain-supporting-contingent actually eat whole grains,
>> except maybe some corn.
>
> of course bread is not the wisest choice and is far from what places like
> the ADA recommend.
I do not see the ADA recommending actual whole grains though. People
SAY whole grains, but then provide diet examples that have no whole
grains in them.
And it's difficult to even find them. Of four grocery stores I
frequent, each has a long cereal aisle, but none has wheat berries nor
whole oats. I can usually find brown rice at the regular grocery, but
the other whole grains I have to buy at health food stores (relatively
expensive) or in bulk (cheap).
I buy them in bulk from a local Mennonite store, but have to keep
buckets around for storage. Wouldn't work so well in a small apartment,
I'd probably go with health food stores in that case.
> i stopped cooking oat meal in the slow cooker and prefer it to be less
> mushy.
> I now cook the steel cuts oats on the stove top.
Steel cut oats are not *whole* grains. They are *cut* grains. Granted,
they are less refined than most grain sources, but they're not whole.
The "whole grains" studies specifically compared diets of whole grains
to diets containing more refined grains and found that whole grains were
better. This makes all the sense in the world as whole grains do not
oxidize (which is also why they keep forever). Once you cut, roll or
grind grains, the studies no longer apply - you're on the side of the
study that was found less healthy, refined grains.
Though you'd never know that from the way products are advertised or the
diets that are recommended based on these studies!
I don't think bread or pasta are so bad if the grain is ground fresh.
If you're grinding it right before you begin cooking, the fats have much
less time to oxidize so you likely get much of the benefit of whole
grains. But I seriously doubt very many people do this. Even people
who bake from scratch generally buy flour, which has been oxidizing for
days, weeks or even months before it is used.
>> IMO, one of the advantages of a non-diabetic spouse is that you get to
>> have tastes of things. I can eat one french fry if they're on his plate.
>> ;)
>
> for me whole grains = about 15 carbs, that is like having a taste when
> compared to
> the amount of rice and bread I would have in the pre diagnosed days.
My tastes are much smaller, more on the size of 2-3g carb. I don't want
to "taste" to the degree that I have to choose between cutting back on
veggies, increasing insulin or having my bg out of goal. A single
french fry or a bite of freshly baked bread is one thing, but I'm not
going to have enough to have to trade my cup of blueberries for them!
I was thinking of you last night, Tom. I am reading the book "Pumping
Insulin" which has a chapter on calculating the amount of carbs you need
to add *or* insulin you need to reduce for various levels of exercise.
They call these Excarbs. Very interesting stuff.
For me, as I heal up from the surgeries and increase my activity level,
I'd rather reduce the insulin than increase the carbs though. I have
hope of getting off insulin again someday, so that's more of a
motivating factor than the ability to eat grain or potatoes, which are
rather bland, boring foods anyways.
Jackie Patti
> b.. Choose whole grain foods over processed grain products. Try brown rice
> with your stir fry or whole wheat spaghetti with your favorite pasta sauce.
See, that's an example of them screwing up the "whole grains" thing.
Brown rice is a whole grain.
Whole wheat spaghetti is NOT. You can walk through any number of fields
and never find the one they harvest spaghetti from! Spaghetti, whether
whole wheat or not, is a refined grain. Very heavily refined.
Kurt
I look at the ADA recommendations as suggestions rather than
mandates. It's pretty broad advice and given the diet of the general
populace it is a vast improvement...that is if it is followed.
People are like snowflakes...cold and annoying :)...I mean no two of
us are alike. That really applies to people with diabetes. Even
given the small sample of diabetics that I know (I'd estimate that
number to be somewhere between 20-30 that I have spoken at any length
with about diabetes) they all have different eating habits and
activity levels.
There is a lot of confusion and disagreement about whole grains and
the issue has come up in this newsgroup many many times. Some people
include them in their diets and some choose not to. It really is a
personal thing and it behooves all of us to choose wisely based on our
particular needs. Working with a professional to help determine those
needs is key IMO.
Kurt
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> >fat or protein but live a very long life without dietary carbs.
>
> True.
Was not true for this 16-year-old girl who forsaked dietary carbs (my
condolences to surviving friends and family):
"Emergency teams were summoned to a local high school to care for a 16-
year-old girl who had suddenly collapsed. She was 5 feet 8 inches tall
and weighed approximately 80 to 85 kg (176 to 187 lb). The patient had
been in good health with no known history of medical problems. She had
started a low-carbohydrate/high-protein diet 1 or 2 weeks earlier in
an effort to lose weight. She had learned about the diet from video
tapes, purchased from an advertisement on television. Her mother had
been on the same diet. She had complied with the dietary regimen,
eating meat, cheese, and salads without fasting. When the paramedics
arrived, the girl was pulseless and apneic. The electrocardiogram
revealed ventricular fibrillation. The patient's trachea was intubated
and cardiopulmonary resuscitation was initiated. Resuscitative
measures, including defibrillation, were without effect. On arrival in
the emergency department, the patient remained pulseless, with no
evidence of cardiac activity. Arterial blood gas analysis revealed a
pH of 6.89, with a base deficit of -19.8. Other laboratory values were
serum sodium 142 mEq/L, ionized calcium 1.12 mEq/L, and serum
potassium 3.8 mEq/L. Further resuscitative efforts were without
effect. Postmortem and toxicologic examinations revealed no apparent
cause for the death. Subsequent cardiologic evaluation of the
patient's 12-year-old sibling including echocardiography and
electrocardiography was within normal limits."
Source:
Ozgirl
"Kurt" <kurtwhee...@hotmail.com> wrote
> There is a lot of confusion and disagreement about whole grains and
> the issue has come up in this newsgroup many many times. Some people
> include them in their diets and some choose not to. It really is a
> personal thing and it behooves all of us to choose wisely based on our
> particular needs. Working with a professional to help determine those
> needs is key IMO.
What annoys me most about products labelled whole-grain (e.g. whole grain
bread of which I eat 1-2 slices per day) is that they have to actually add
back B vitamins.This is why I prefer to get my B's from a source like
brewer's yeast. 1 "dose" a day in a smoothie is more than enough. I hate
brown rice but last night's dinner - chicken stir fry wouldn't stretch to 5
of us (despite lots of extra veggies) without a filler. The kids had white
rice. I had a small amount of brown rice mixed with some wild "rice". It was
edible, but more importantly it didn't need added vitamins.
It is sad times when we no longer can rely on getting all the vitamins we
need from food. I am not sure that brewer's yeast would be classed as a food
as such but at least, IMO it is better than reaching for an expensive bottle
of vitamins.
Ozgirl
"Jackie Patti" <jpa...@ccil.org> wrote in message
But nothing is as bad as boxed macaroni
> and cheese, no degree of politeness could ever get me to eat even a single
> bite of that again.
My kids would disagree ;) But I often make them my version of a pasta bake
which is way better and they actually like it despite the fact I lace it
with vegetables. I also add sautéed bacon to the mix. The bacon I use
doesn't leave grease in the pan so it is not high fat by any means. The full
fat cheese does though :)
dumb_f...@yahoo.com
for a while, and now they're both back? at the same time....
Ozgirl
<dumb_f...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:hvgvb3p01qole030a...@4ax.com...
> Doesn't it seem like both Kurt and Tom disppeared together
> for a while, and now they're both back? at the same time....
No, that was me and Kurt :) Tom was here.
Nicky
>Doesn't it seem like both Kurt and Tom disppeared together
>for a while, and now they're both back? at the same time....
Nah, they're different people. Was nice whilst it lasted...
Jim Chinnis
Tim, I'm very much impressed by the fact that we still don't know what
causes DM. I'm very respectful of all who look at the data with open minds.
I just read the article by the ADA in the URL at the end of your post. It
was interesting. As an experiment, as I often do when time permits, I tried
one of there main cites to see how well it agreed with what the ADA said it
said.
Take a look at reference #75, the paper by Marshall et al. The ADA paper
states, "Of note, there is little evidence that total carbohydrate intake is
associated with the development of type 2 diabetes (30,70,73,74). Rather, a
stronger association has been observed between total fat and saturated fat
intake and type 2 diabetes (75,76)..."
In fact, if you read reference 75, no statistically significant association
was found between dietary fat and the diagnosis of DM. See page 593, the
first Results paragraph. So the paper cited does not support the ADA claim,
as the ADA says it does.
I also found it interesting that the paper's authors made a classic mistake
of assuming they would find the result they were looking for, and in doing
so, may have failed to see what was going on in the data. For instance, they
adjust the odds ratio for diabetes on BMI. They state that this would
"underestimate" the effect of higher % fat diets on the development of DM
because the major effect of higher % fat intake is increased BMI and
increased BMI causes DM. Of course, now we know that dietary fat does not
increase BMI as much as dietary carbs. Or at least we no longer blindly
believe that higher % fat means higher body fat...
So the adjusted odds ratios for increased % fat and decreased % carb weren't
significant EVEN THOUGH they had factored out the increase in weight due to
higher carbs.
Some (many) of these older (1991) papers don't say what people repeatedly
think they say. And when you read them, you often see how contaminated the
analyses were by the preconception that fat is bad.
Frank t2
... are you my mommy ... ?
(I'm feeling hungry after that post)
"Ozgirl" <are_we_t...@maccas.com> a écrit ...
Ozgirl
" Frank t2" <a@b.c> wrote in message
news:46c0daa6$0$22420$79c1...@nan-newsreader-06.noos.net...
>
> ... are you my mommy ... ?
> (I'm feeling hungry after that post)
I must admit, I eat the crusty bits left in the pan after it is baked. I am
not a big pasta lover but pasta bake is rather nice :)
Alan S
Just more subdued without the others:-)
Alan S
<jchi...@SPAMalum.mit.edu> wrote:
>Susan <neve...@nomail.com> wrote in part:
>
>>folks I know in the Dakotas who grew up grain farming
>>assure me that there's a lot of chopped up animals mixed in the grain
>>during the harvesting process, all the critters living in the fields.
>
>So, you're saying grain isn't all bad, huh?
Hidden protein content:-)
Cheri
dumb_f...@yahoo.com wrote in message ...
>Doesn't it seem like both Kurt and Tom disppeared together
>for a while, and now they're both back? at the same time....
No, Tom has been here all along, but Kurt has been gone for awhile.
:-)
Cheri
Cheri
Jackie Patti
> My kids would disagree ;) But I often make them my version of a pasta bake
> which is way better and they actually like it despite the fact I lace it
> with vegetables. I also add sautéed bacon to the mix. The bacon I use
> doesn't leave grease in the pan so it is not high fat by any means. The full
> fat cheese does though :)
I couldn't do that. If the bacon doesn't leave grease in the pan, what
do you feed the chickens in winter and what do you make soap with?
Yes, I *do* actually do these things. What can I say, I'm weird. ;)
Ozgirl
I have no chooks and I buy my soap, lol.
James...@yahoo.com
> > its also from 1999
>
> Moreover, Darwin's theory of evolution as posited in his book, The
> Origin of Species, is dead.
>
> No new species have emerged as predicted by this theory.
>
> A theory requires support by successful predictions to keep it viable.
>
One usual definition of a species is a group of living things which
can reproduce themselves and which will not cross breed with related
species and produce young which will be able to reproduce. ie a
species is reproductively isolated from other species. Of course
there are other less restrictive definitions also. Using this
restrictive definition Dr Sheele observed a new species originate
clear back about 1960. Way before gene splicing and all the modern
stuff.
So we have a new species and a successful prediction by Darwin.
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Species, predicted new species of greater complexity.
Instead what has been observed is degeneration (loss of biodiversity
and loss of complexity) instead of Darwin's evolution:
http://www.evolutionisdegeneration.com
Bottomline:
Darwin's Theory of Evolution is still very much dead.
Jawas
Jackie,
Wonderful post and perfect observations. I consume plenty of whole
grains! But I sprout them and add them to sprouted legumes. I cook
them with Indian spices. I even add freshly ground flax seed powder to
the mix. I top it off with fresh green coriander. It comes out great.
I never spike more that 130 to 140 max. Most of the time I am under
120.
You have to be creative to consume the whole grains. But it can be
done and the results are quite delicious.
Java
Alan S
Thank you Jim.
Illuminating analysis.
I do find it sad that the ADA seems to have a need to
mis-represent study results in the way you highlight. If
this was an isolated case it could be disregarded. However,
it's not, as the treatment of the research by Gannon and
Nuttall has shown.
dumb_f...@yahoo.com
wrote:
>On Sun, 12 Aug 2007 19:38:34 -0700, dumb_f...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>>Doesn't it seem like both Kurt and Tom disppeared together
>>for a while, and now they're both back? at the same time....
>
>Nah, they're different people. Was nice whilst it lasted...
>
Yeah, it was....
dumb_f...@yahoo.com
Jackie Patti
>>> On Aug 13, 2:48 pm, Jackie Patti <jpa...@ccil.org> wrote:
>
> Jackie,
>
> Wonderful post and perfect observations. I consume plenty of whole
> grains! But I sprout them and add them to sprouted legumes. I cook
> them with Indian spices. I even add freshly ground flax seed powder to
> the mix. I top it off with fresh green coriander. It comes out great.
> I never spike more that 130 to 140 max. Most of the time I am under
> 120.
That sounds really yummy!
Gantlet
"Jim Chinnis" <jchi...@SPAMalum.mit.edu> wrote in message
news:pn21c351lrspf73fo...@4ax.com...
> "Gantlet" <T...@TomsDiabeticDiary.com> wrote in part:
>
>> rice
>>with your stir fry or whole wheat spaghetti with your favorite pasta
>>sauce.
>
> Whole wheat sphaghetti is a processed grain product. The advice is
> inconsistent.
most people that read the ADA site dont take what is said apart bit by bit.
what I get from the above is.
instead of regular pasta use whole wheat. if everyday we would choose the
healthiest food
it would be very boring and we would be eating the same thing everyday.
but if you follow the ADA's advice you would know that whole grains are much
better
than pasta.
>
>> e.. Choose lean meats like cuts of beef and pork that end in "loin" such
>>as pork loin and sirloin. Remove the skin from chicken and turkey.
>
> Most such meats are from feedlots or factory farms and have distorted
> lipid
> profiles, among other things. Naturally-raised meats (any cuts) would be
> preferable. There's no evidence that leaner cuts from natually-raised
> animals are healthier than fattier cuts.
they only mention cuts of meat. they mention nothing of how it should be
raised.
>
>> f.. Choose non-fat dairy such as skim milk, non-fat yogurt and non-fat
>>cheese.
>
> Evidence seems to support the healthfulness of full-fat cheeses, I don't
> know what basis they have for recommending low fat cheese only. I've also
> seen reports that consumption of skim milk rather than whole milk is a
> risk
> for obesity.
many studies I see posted here that support higher fat diets dont really
prove
much to me and from what I have seen most doctors are not all that impressed
either.
>
>> g.. Choose water and calorie-free "diet" drinks instead of regular soda,
>>fruit punch, sweet tea and other sugar-sweetened drinks.
>
> Recent evidence is that "diet" drinks are worse for obesity than
> "regular."
i know lots of people read about results of a study and think..
there you have it.. the study proves it. I dont buy into most studies that
are done today
and think for the most part they are much like and used like commercials
today.
>
>> h.. Choose liquid oils for cooking instead of solid fats that can be
>> high
>>in saturated and trans fats. Remember that fats are high in calories. If
>>you're trying to lose weight, watch your portion sizes of added fats.
>
> Recent evidence is that low-fat foods lead to obesity more than regular
> foods do.
Study?
>
>> i.. Cut back on high calorie snack foods and desserts like chips,
>> cookies,
>>cakes, and full-fat ice cream.
>
> You should eliminate all processed foods. The only food on the list that
> should be acceptable on occasion might be the full-fat ice cream.
we can read study after study but because psychology is also used in
treating
diabetics I dont think any of us or even a doctor has the right to tell
anyone what they should or shouldnt eat.
--
Tom
Chat in peace with other diabetes at the American Diabetes Associations Web
Site.
http://community.diabetes.org/n/pfx/forum.aspx?nav=index&webtag=amdiabetesz&redirCnt=1
Information You Can "Trust" From Your American Diabetes Association
www.diabetes.org
Information on Specific Types of Fat.
http://www.diabetes.org/nutrition-and-recipes/nutrition/foodlabel/specific-fats.jsp
Gantlet
"Gantlet" <T...@TomsDiabeticDiary.com> wrote in message
news:%n9wi.3091$hK5.948@trndny02...
> we can read study after study but because psychology is also used in
> treating
> diabetics I dont think any of us or even a doctor has the right to tell
> anyone what they should or shouldnt eat.
what I mean by the above is.
a doctor that posts on the interent shouldnt try to treat patients over the
web.
Geoff
> Darwin's theory of evolution as posited in his book, The Origin of
> Species, predicted new species of greater complexity.
Wrong. There is nothing in evolutionary theory that even remotely posits a
trend to greater complexity. Even if there was, how would you measure it?
> Instead what has been observed is degeneration (loss of biodiversity
Which has fuck all to do with evolutioanry theory and everything to do with
human impact on the environment.
> and loss of complexity
Go ahead. Make my day. Give me a cite. Tell me what the metric is.
> ) instead of Darwin's evolution:
>
> http://www.evolutionisdegeneration.com
>
> Bottomline:
>
> Darwin's Theory of Evolution is still very much dead.
Bottom line: Chung is an idiot and doesn't no shit about his own field of
biology. sad.
Llanzlan Klazmon the 15th
news:1187053615.2...@r34g2000hsd.googlegroups.com:
Read and weep:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-meritt/complexity.html
Klazmon.
>
KC
"Ozgirl" <are_we_t...@maccas.com> wrote in message
news:13c1i2b...@news.supernews.com...
> I hate brown rice but last night's dinner - chicken stir fry wouldn't
> stretch to 5 of us (despite lots of extra veggies) without a filler. The
> kids had white rice. I had a small amount of brown rice mixed with some
> wild "rice". It was edible, but more importantly it didn't need added
> vitamins.
I gotta wonder why your kids had white rice. When I went through a trying
to eat only whole grains phase for awhile before deciding grains didn't work
for me much at all, my kids ate the brown rice with me. I have heard
references to brown rice being bad tasting, but it seemed alot like white
rice to me.
KC
> Look at a big bowl of mixed salad vegetables as an example. Those veggies
> have very few calories, so they don't count much towards macronutrient
> percentages. The dressing has most of the calories so determines the
> macronutrient breakdown. My SIL would tend to put a sweeter, low-fat
> dressing on it, so her salad would be a "low fat" meal. I would tend to
> put a dairy-based dressing on it, so my salad would be a "low carb" meal.
> The rest of our family would tend to skip the salad and eat something else
> instead. I don't think whether they'd eat a burger or potatoes is nearly
> as significant as the fact that they skipped the salad.
>
>
I think you have a great point here. I try to eat lots of fresh produce
these days, and I really feel better than I have in years.
KC
Ozgirl
"KC" <nom...@forme.com> wrote in message
news:Bcbwi.13893$ya1....@news02.roc.ny...
The kids don't like brown rice. I don't see any resemblance between brown
and white - texture or flavour. One is soft, the other remains very chewy.
Julie Bove
Angela will only eat brown rice if it is mixed with things. I don't think
she notices the difference that way. Like mixing it with cooked chicken and
vegetables. She'll eat quinoa the same way, thinking it's rice. But she
prefers the white rice.
Personally, I think white rice tastes a lot better. But I know the brown is
better for you.
gu...@consolidated.net
<Kla...@llurdiaxorb.govt> wrote:
>"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <and...@emorycardiology.com> wrote in
>news:1187053615.2...@r34g2000hsd.googlegroups.com:
>
>> neighbor James216...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Moreover, Darwin's theory of evolution as posited in his book, The
>>> > Origin of Species, is dead.
>>> >
The book may go but the records nthe crust of the earth will remain.
Almost all religions have caveats against falsehood.
Ever hear of DNA?
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
parsi...@gmail.com
<and...@emorycardiology.com> wrote:
> neighbor James216...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>
> > > Moreover, Darwin's theory of evolution as posited in his book, The
> > > Origin of Species, is dead.
>
> > > No new species have emerged as predicted by this theory.
>
> > > A theory requires support by successful predictions to keep it viable.
>
> > One usual definition of a species is a group of living things which
> > can reproduce themselves and which will not cross breed with related
> > species and produce young which will be able to reproduce. ie a
> > species is reproductively isolated from other species. Of course
> > there are other less restrictive definitions also. Using this
> > restrictive definition Dr Sheele observed a new species originate
> > clear back about 1960. Way before gene splicing and all the modern
> > stuff.
>
> > So we have a new species and a successful prediction by Darwin.
>
> Darwin's theory of evolution as posited in his book, The Origin of
> Species, predicted new species of greater complexity.
>
> Instead what has been observed is degeneration (loss of biodiversity
> and loss of complexity) instead of Darwin's evolution:
>
> http://www.evolutionisdegeneration.com
>
> Bottomline:
>
> Darwin's Theory of Evolution is still very much dead.
No. Your brain activity is still very much dead.
You seem incapable of one rational thought and your "intellectual
activity" consists in little more than seriously disturbed rant about
your god. Even the Pope isn't *that* fanatic...
Try to show some intelligence and then, we'll discuss with you.
Until then, fuck off, moron and stop posting to alt.atheism.
Michael Gray
Chung is seriously mentally ill, and deserves to be treated as such.
Chris Malcolm
> neighbor James216...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>> >
>> > Moreover, Darwin's theory of evolution as posited in his book, The
>> > Origin of Species, is dead.
>> >
>> > No new species have emerged as predicted by this theory.
>> >
>> > A theory requires support by successful predictions to keep it viable.
>> >
>>
>> One usual definition of a species is a group of living things which
>> can reproduce themselves and which will not cross breed with related
>> species and produce young which will be able to reproduce. ie a
>> species is reproductively isolated from other species. Of course
>> there are other less restrictive definitions also. Using this
>> restrictive definition Dr Sheele observed a new species originate
>> clear back about 1960. Way before gene splicing and all the modern
>> stuff.
>>
>> So we have a new species and a successful prediction by Darwin.
> Darwin's theory of evolution as posited in his book, The Origin of
> Species, predicted new species of greater complexity.
> Instead what has been observed is degeneration (loss of biodiversity
> and loss of complexity) instead of Darwin's evolution:
If you think evolution is necessarily counter to loss of biodiversity
and complexity you obviously haven't even read Darwin's book, let
alone anything more up to date!
> http://www.evolutionisdegeneration.com
> Bottomline:
> Darwin's Theory of Evolution is still very much dead.
Newton's celestial mechanics is dead too, but that's because modern
science and technology has moved on past it. Even something now as
everyday as car satellite navigation requires Einsteinian temporal
relativism in the satellite orbital calculations to work. So has
evolutionary theory moved on since Darwin's time. In fact so has *all*
science since Victorian times! Do try to keep up at the back of the
class!
--
Chris Malcolm c...@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> >>> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > Moreover, Darwin's theory of evolution as posited in his book, The
> >>> > Origin of Species, is dead.
>
> The book may go but the records nthe crust of the earth will remain.
GOD has created and is creating all things seen and unseen, including
all things in the crust of the earth.
> Almost all religions have caveats against falsehood.
It remains my choice to continue to write truthfully.
It also remains my choice to refrain from being religious.
Christianity is not a religion but a relationship with the risen LORD
Jesus Christ:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/TheWay
> Ever hear of DNA?
Yes.
GOD has given me the experience of discovering and working with DNA
sequences that are identical in both base composition and function in
all species of organisms that are living here on this planet.
This experience has proven to me that Darwin's Theory of Evolution
remains stillborn.
Suggested additional reading:
http://www.evolutionisdegeneration.com/
Chris Malcolm
> On Aug 12, 3:53?pm, Susan <neverm...@nomail.com> wrote:
>> Gantlet wrote:
>> > I like how they attacked whole grains and made a list of how grains lack
>> > nutrients.
>>
>> They didn't attack anything; they're scientists, not politicians.
>>
>> > For the matter they can even say the same thing about fruits and veggies.
>> > you can live very healthy on whole grains alone.
>>
>> No, you can't. Fruits and veggies are nutrient dense and full of life
>> saving antioxidants. Grains are calorie dense with lots of oxidants and
>> little nutrient density.
> Not true if you're talking about "whole" grains. The antioxidants in
> whole grains are in the germ and the bran of a grain. As far as
> nutrients, whole grains are a good source of Vitamin B, Vitamin E,
> magnesium, iron and fiber as well as other valuable antioxidants not
> found in some fruits and vegetables.
> But don't take my word for it...GIYF.
What matters to a diabetic is how much carbohydrate they would have to
eat in order to acquire useful amounts of these other valuable
nutrients, in other words the relative percentage of these useful
other nutrients with respect to carbohydrate. It's been pointed out to
you a number of times before by a number of different people that in
that respect, from a T2 diabetic point of view, compared to many
easily available vegetables most easily available whole grains are
somewhere between not much good and worse than useless. This is easily
verified by checking the numbers in any nutritional database.
However, as has been often observed by scientists and philosophers
from Hume onwards, those who refuse to do arithmetic are condemned to
talk rubbish :-)
Chris Malcolm
> Jackie Patti wrote:
>> Gantlet wrote:
>>
>>> Corn, for instance, has
>>> almost twice the antioxidant activity of apples, while wheat and oats
>>> almost equal broccoli and spinach in antioxidant activity.
>> I can eat an AWFUL lot of broccoli and spinach for the same carb count
>> as a small serving of wheat or oats.
[...]
>> One of the things that bugs me with the "whole grains" thing is that the
>> studies were done on whole grains, but are used to justify selling
>> products made from milled grains. Bread is not a whole grain, you can
>> walk through any number of fields and never see bread growing! I think
>> very few of the grain-supporting-contingent actually eat whole grains,
>> except maybe some corn.
[...]
> YES. The minute you grind a grain, it's oxidizing. And the
> insulinogenic effects and bg it raises promote oxidation in our bodies.
> Not only that; folks I know in the Dakotas who grew up grain farming
> assure me that there's a lot of chopped up animals mixed in the grain
> during the harvesting process, all the critters living in the fields.
> Also, they literally shovel malathion into the silage to deal with the
> bugs that infest stored grain.
In fact the remains of dead bugs etc. mixed up with the grain in grain
stores are a very useful source of B vits in whole grain diets. It has
sometimes been found that measures to improve the hygiene of grain
storage have led to B deficiencies in poor populations who couldn't
afford to eat much else.
gu...@consolidated.net
wrote:
Chris, Darwin is adequate for me. It was a good first order
and a major jump in understanding of our "?". Some
are trying to use the refinements to discredit the
explanation and go to the Human like creator. A
creator like a human would be gross.
A creator is a part of our brain. Nothing wrong with that
unless the ?USERS" try to pervert the concept.
Read some of the earlier German philosophers.
"How do I know I am not alone and others are just in
my imagination." type of musings
Alan S
<are_we_t...@maccas.com> wrote:
>
>The kids don't like brown rice. I don't see any resemblance between brown
>and white - texture or flavour. One is soft, the other remains very chewy.
I'm a slow learner sometimes. It took me months to realise
that it takes a minimum of 45 minutes to properly cook brown
rice. I couldn't break the habit of 10-12 minutes that I had
used for white rice for decades.
Try it:-)
Alan S
<T...@TomsDiabeticDiary.com> wrote:
>
>most people that read the ADA site dont take what is said apart bit by bit.
>what I get from the above is.
Those who write it should. They have a responsibility to get
it right.
Will, T2
On 14-Aug-2007, Chris Malcolm <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> What matters to a diabetic is how much carbohydrate they would have to
> eat in order to acquire useful amounts of these other valuable
> nutrients, in other words the relative percentage of these useful
> other nutrients with respect to carbohydrate. It's been pointed out to
> you a number of times before by a number of different people that in
> that respect, from a T2 diabetic point of view, compared to many
> easily available vegetables most easily available whole grains are
> somewhere between not much good and worse than useless. This is easily
> verified by checking the numbers in any nutritional database.
>
> However, as has been often observed by scientists and philosophers
> from Hume onwards, those who refuse to do arithmetic are condemned to
> talk rubbish :-)
You make a lot of sense, Chris.... Without making any assumptions about any
of our fellow posters, it has been my observation in life that those who
refuse to quantify and "talk arithmetic" were usually bad in math in
school....
Will, T2
Ron Peterson
<heartdo...@emorycardiology.com> wrote:
> Was not true for this 16-year-old girl who forsaked dietary carbs (my
> condolences to surviving friends and family):
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/442894_print says that the girl
was eating salads so she wasn't completely carbohydrate free.
--
Ron
Gantlet
> What matters to a diabetic is how much carbohydrate they would have to
> eat in order to acquire useful amounts of these other valuable
> nutrients, in other words the relative percentage of these useful
> other nutrients with respect to carbohydrate. It's been pointed out to
> you a number of times before by a number of different people that in
> that respect, from a T2 diabetic point of view, compared to many
> easily available vegetables
i figured I would stop this right here.
Low Carb vs Low Fat - I dont know why they try to make it look like
its Whole Grains vs Veggies - Veggies are carbs the difference is really
Fat vs Whole Grains but that isnt a good selling point.
They eat low cab that leaves fat and protiens.
Gantlet
So did I :)
>
> Take a look at reference #75, the paper by Marshall et al. The ADA paper
> states, "Of note, there is little evidence that total carbohydrate intake
> is
> associated with the development of type 2 diabetes (30,70,73,74). Rather,
> a
> stronger association has been observed between total fat and saturated fat
> intake and type 2 diabetes (75,76)..."
>
> In fact, if you read reference 75,
I did :) and I recommend every newbie should as well.
no statistically significant association
> was found between dietary fat and the diagnosis of DM. See page 593, the
> first Results paragraph. So the paper cited does not support the ADA
> claim,
> as the ADA says it does.
here is what I found or should I say here is what it actually says.
To further investigate the role of dietary fat and carbohydrate as potential
risk factors for the onset of non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus,
current diet was assessed among a geographically based group of 1,317
subjects without a prior diagnosis of diabetes who were seen in the period
from 1984 to 1988 in two counties in southern Colorado. In this study,
24-hour diet recalls were reported prior to an oral glucose tolerance test.
Persons with previously undiagnosed diabetes
The findings support the hypothesis that high-fat, low-carbohydrate diets
are associated with the onset of non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus in
humans.
http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/134/6/590?ijkey=19dbbe81e5c633881e20baafb30be946894cad66&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>
>
> http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/442894_print says that the girl
> was eating salads so she wasn't completely carbohydrate free.
Many thanks, much praise, and all the glory to GOD for HIS compelling
you to unwittingly heighten concerns about low-carb dieting.
It remains wiser to eat less, down to the optimal amount, to becoming
healthier (hungrier) to lose all the bad "inside" fat (visceral
adipose tissue or VAT) to cure the insulin resistance (IR/MetS) and
possibly cure even type-2 diabetes.
It is only when we are hungry that our bodies get rid of VAT:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/Healing
This completely free Approach comes with free cardiologist support via
usenet plus an unprecedented million-dollar guarantee:
Be hungry... be healthy... be happy... be blessed:
Kurt
My comment was in response to Susan's inaccurate statement about whole
grains, not what is better for a T2 diabetic.
Kurt
Conspiracy of Doves
Am I the only one who imagines the adults from the peanuts cartoons
talking whenever the Chungbot says anything?
Jim Chinnis
>
But the ADA folks who wrote the paper and cited this study in support of
their position should have read the paper and not just the abstract.
Abstracts are often written by clerical staff or others not even associated
with the research.
Here's the actual finding re diabetes risk from increased fat and reduced
carb:
"The adjusted odds ratio (OR) that related
a 40-g/day increase in fat intake to noninsulin-
dependent diabetes mellitus (OR =
1.51) and the odds ratio that related a 90-g/
day decrease in carbohydrate intake to noninsulin-
dependent diabetes mellitus (OR =
1.39) were not statistically significant (table
4)."
This is from the actual paper, not the abstract.
The authors wander around a bit trying to argue that they had found a result
to be taken seriously, so it's not too surprising that the abstract writer
confused things, but their actual statistical analysis argued for no effect
AFTER ADJUSTMENT FOR BMI. I think they were trapped in the anti-fat dogma of
their time (1984-1988).
--
Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA
Gantlet
>> But the ADA folks who wrote the paper and cited this study in support of
> their position should have read the paper and not just the abstract.
> Abstracts are often written by clerical staff or others not even
> associated
> with the research.
Clerical Staff often do a lot of writting for lots of people.
in the other post you said you went to the link provided by Tim to see if it
agreed with what the
ADA was saying.
You came back and said
"In fact, if you read reference 75, no statistically significant association
was found between dietary fat and the diagnosis of DM."
actually that isn to be found anyplace on the page.
I went to the page and found it does agree.
about what you wrote below.(saying its on another page). I would have to see
the actual page.
after 4 years I dont take anyones word for anything anymore.
its become to commercial here.
Jim Chinnis
>
>"Jim Chinnis" <jchi...@SPAMalum.mit.edu> wrote in message
>news:lgp3c39glies1aq09...@4ax.com...
>>> But the ADA folks who wrote the paper and cited this study in support of
>> their position should have read the paper and not just the abstract.
>> Abstracts are often written by clerical staff or others not even
>> associated
>> with the research.
>
>Clerical Staff often do a lot of writting for lots of people.
>
>
>in the other post you said you went to the link provided by Tim to see if it
>agreed with what the
>ADA was saying.
That's right.
>You came back and said
>
>
>"In fact, if you read reference 75, no statistically significant association
>was found between dietary fat and the diagnosis of DM."
Right again.
>actually that isn to be found anyplace on the page.
>I went to the page and found it does agree.
What page are you talking about? I think you mean the abstract. That's NOT
the paper. The results are what you should be looking for. The results
section of the actual paper.
The full text of the paper is available here:
>about what you wrote below.(saying its on another page). I would have to see
>the actual page.
>after 4 years I dont take anyones word for anything anymore.
>its become to commercial here.
Read the paper. Do the math. (The math is sometimes wrong, too.)
Gantlet
>> the difference between the 2 diets is not really in that low carbers eat
>> more broccoli
>> or that those on low fat do not eat broccoli and other veggies.
>> the real difference is Fat vs Whole Grain.
>> fruits and veggies are carbs - for me that means I get about 130 carbs a
>> day from just fruits and veggies
>> thats more than many low carbers eat.
>
> That may be true for you, Gantlet. But I do not think most people doing
> low-fat eat 130g of carb in fruit and veggies. Most are more likely to
> get their carbs in bagels, pasta and sugar.
When we are actually thinking something its important to understand
that sometimes what we think is a total guess.
and if they are eating only flour and sugar they are not eating
a diet anyone would say is healthy.
> And that brings up a very good point, in that I think eating large doses
> of fresh produce is much more important to health overall than the
> macronutrient content of the diet.
>
> Look at a big bowl of mixed salad vegetables as an example. Those veggies
> have very few calories, so they don't count much towards macronutrient
> percentages. The dressing has most of the calories so determines the
> macronutrient breakdown. My SIL would tend to put a sweeter, low-fat
> dressing on it, so her salad would be a "low fat" meal. I would tend to
> put a dairy-based dressing on it, so my salad would be a "low carb" meal.
> The rest of our family would tend to skip the salad and eat something else
> instead. I don't think whether they'd eat a burger or potatoes is nearly
> as significant as the fact that they skipped the salad.
Sorry to say that a of people look at salad as meaningless.
the other day my wife and I went out to eat. We shared a salad
and each had our own lil :) lunch. for desert we shared another salad :).
>
> No, we did not have chickens before I was diabetic, we've only lived in
> the country for 5-6 years now. It was two decades ago that I was first
> diagnosed.
20 years wow. where did you come from and do you miss the farm?
I live in the big city but have the heart of a country boy.
>
> I can remember individual things I ate, but not my overall diet as it's
> simply too far back. And I was busy raising a baby and being in college
> and paid almost no attention to diet except for the cost of groceries.
yes its not that easy to not make a total guess out of it in those care free
days.
but my diet was what I would call a High Diet.. High in Carbs, Fat and
Protien.
> I was in college as a single mom, so there's things like fasting for 6-8
> days at a time in order to have enough to feed my daughter that occured
> periodically.
wow thank god I never had to do that. these days I keep my dogs nice and
plump :).
>
> I know we didn't eat much sugar, cause I cooked mostly from scratch, cause
> I couldn't afford prepared foods much. Typical desserts for us were
> things like rice pudding or gingerbread, both made from scratch. Rice and
> flour are very cheap calories. But I didn't have a lot of time for
> cooking, between school and parenting, so desserts just didn't happen
> much.
i would put lots of sugar in my coffee and my cereal. Desserts :)
I live in Manhattan and could have had anything I wanted and often did.
> And a lot of hamburger-helper-type dishes, but with ground turkey instead,
> as that was dead cheap back then . It's more expensive now as it's become
> popular with the low-fat emphasis, but back then you could get it dirt
> cheap. I could make a HUGE pot of something to feed us for days out of
> only a pound of turkey.
somethings remind me of when I was growing up. it was my mother and us 4
hungry kids.
and poor Muffin eating her playdoe like gains burgers :(.
>
> I also know there are certain foods I shall never eat again because we
> overdid them then. Plain spaghetti is one - I can handle other pasta
> shapes, but not the one that. I shall also never eat bologna or hot dogs
> again for the same reason. But nothing is as bad as boxed macaroni and
> cheese, no degree of politeness could ever get me to eat even a single
> bite of that again.
after I grew up and left the house I had a few roommates 2 of which were
brothers.
they would eat bologna everyday, every meal. if we went to a BBQ someone
would also crack a joke with them
saying they would throw some bologna on the BBQ just for them. because they
would always say thats all they eat cause they liked it. truth is when they
didnt have bologna in their hands they had a straw up their nose.
>> I do not see the ADA recommending actual whole grains though. People
> SAY whole grains, but then provide diet examples that have no whole grains
> in them.
the number 1 thing a newbe should do when following a low fat diet is
working with a dietitian.
>
> And it's difficult to even find them.
whole grains are great but there are other healthy choices, beans, rice
>
> Steel cut oats are not *whole* grains. They are *cut* grains. Granted,
> they are less refined than most grain sources, but they're not whole.
>
> The "whole grains" studies specifically compared diets of whole grains to
> diets containing more refined grains and found that whole grains were
> better. This makes all the sense in the world as whole grains do not
> oxidize (which is also why they keep forever). Once you cut, roll or
> grind grains, the studies no longer apply - you're on the side of the
> study that was found less healthy, refined grains.
i dont think those in the less healthy side ate steel cut oats.
Yes I eat steel cut oats and even bran cereal sometimes for breakfast.
and for me that works better than bacon and eggs.
> I was thinking of you last night, Tom.
its been a long time since i heard that.
I am reading the book "Pumping
> Insulin" which has a chapter on calculating the amount of carbs you need
> to add *or* insulin you need to reduce for various levels of exercise.
> They call these Excarbs. Very interesting stuff.
>
> For me, as I heal up from the surgeries and increase my activity level,
> I'd rather reduce the insulin than increase the carbs though. I have hope
> of getting off insulin again someday, so that's more of a motivating
> factor than the ability to eat grain or potatoes, which are rather bland,
> boring foods anyways.
I hope you continue to get better. I am on day 2 of not smoking :)
Tom
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> talking whenever the Chungbot says anything?
It seems your sockpuppet is suffering from psychoses, satan.
Hearing incomprehensible voices while reading a usenet post would be
diagnostic tell.
In Jesus' name, I rebuke you, satan.
Prayerfully in the awesome power and might of the Holy Spirit,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Servant to the KING of kings and LORD of lords
TC
<heartdo...@emorycardiology.com> wrote:
> friend Jim Chinnis wrote:
> > convicted neighbor Susan <neverm...@nomail.com> wrote:
>
> > >You'd die without
> > >fat or protein but live a very long life without dietary carbs.
>
> > True.
>
> Was not true for this 16-year-old girl who forsaked dietary carbs (my
> condolences to surviving friends and family):
>
> year-old girl who had suddenly collapsed. She was 5 feet 8 inches tall
> and weighed approximately 80 to 85 kg (176 to 187 lb). The patient had
> been in good health with no known history of medical problems. She had
> started a low-carbohydrate/high-protein diet 1 or 2 weeks earlier in
> an effort to lose weight. She had learned about the diet from video
> tapes, purchased from an advertisement on television. Her mother had
> been on the same diet. She had complied with the dietary regimen,
> eating meat, cheese, and salads without fasting. When the paramedics
> arrived, the girl was pulseless and apneic. The electrocardiogram
> revealed ventricular fibrillation. The patient's trachea was intubated
> and cardiopulmonary resuscitation was initiated. Resuscitative
> measures, including defibrillation, were without effect. On arrival in
> the emergency department, the patient remained pulseless, with no
> evidence of cardiac activity. Arterial blood gas analysis revealed a
> pH of 6.89, with a base deficit of -19.8. Other laboratory values were
> serum sodium 142 mEq/L, ionized calcium 1.12 mEq/L, and serum
> potassium 3.8 mEq/L. Further resuscitative efforts were without
> effect. Postmortem and toxicologic examinations revealed no apparent
> cause for the death. Subsequent cardiologic evaluation of the
> patient's 12-year-old sibling including echocardiography and
> electrocardiography was within normal limits."
>
> Source:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/28ycon
>
> --
> Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Chung, you friggin' heartless moron. You are such a friggin'
opportunist.
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> opportunist.
Name-calling simply shows that you are lost:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/dream.asp
The brethren of LORD Jesus Christ are neither perfect nor more
special...
... we are simply forgiven by GOD:
http://www.interviewwithgod.com/forgiven/
May you wisely choose to be forgiven too by publicly declaring with
your mouth that "Jesus is LORD:"
http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/TheWay
parsi...@gmail.com
Get help. Now.
You're frightening.
>
> Prayerfully in the awesome power and might of the Holy Spirit,
>
> Andrew <><
> --
> Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> Servant to the KING of kings and LORD of lords- Zitierten Text ausblenden -
>
> - Zitierten Text anzeigen -
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> >
> > In Jesus' name, I rebuke you, satan.
>
> Get help.
Jesus is all the help I need to rebuke satan.
> Now. You're frightening.
"Fear not those who can kill the body and do nothing more. Fear HIM
Who can destroy the soul." -- LORD Jesus Christ.
Amen:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/fear.asp
Reverently fear GOD and dread nothing (especially not satan) that is
of this world:
http://TruthRUS.org/DreadNought
Be hungry... be healthy... be happy... be blessed:
http://TheWellnessFoundation.com/PressRelease
Prayerfully in Jesus' awesome love,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Cardiologist
Medusa
> Jesus is all the help I need to rebuke satan.
Easy to "rebuke" that which does not exist.
> > Now. You're frightening.
>
> "Fear not those who can kill the body and do nothing more. Fear HIM
> Who can destroy the soul." -- LORD Jesus Christ.
You mean like Voldemort? That's another work of fiction written for
children.
Medusa
Dave Oldridge
news:1187053615.2...@r34g2000hsd.googlegroups.com:
> neighbor James216...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>> >
>> > Moreover, Darwin's theory of evolution as posited in his book, The
>> > Origin of Species, is dead.
>> >
>> > No new species have emerged as predicted by this theory.
>> >
>> > A theory requires support by successful predictions to keep it
viable.
>> >
>>
>> One usual definition of a species is a group of living things which
>> can reproduce themselves and which will not cross breed with related
>> species and produce young which will be able to reproduce. ie a
>> species is reproductively isolated from other species. Of course
>> there are other less restrictive definitions also. Using this
>> restrictive definition Dr Sheele observed a new species originate
>> clear back about 1960. Way before gene splicing and all the modern
>> stuff.
>>
>> So we have a new species and a successful prediction by Darwin.
>
> Darwin's theory of evolution as posited in his book, The Origin of
> Species, predicted new species of greater complexity.
>
> Instead what has been observed is degeneration (loss of biodiversity
> and loss of complexity) instead of Darwin's evolution:
>
> http://www.evolutionisdegeneration.com
The first page I looked at made false claims. Complexity only increases
in evolution if it has positive reproductive survival value.
Not only that, many types of mutations INCREASE IT.
If you do not know this, then you know nothing about genetics. If you do
know it, then you're being untruthful about it.
Now a question for you. How does anyone earn an MD without knowing this?
What kinds of institutions hand out degrees on the basis of such abject
ignorance?
--
Dave Oldridge+
ICQ 1800667
Dave Oldridge
Uh, to do that you would actually have to be IN Christ, not just making
spluttering noises about it.
>
> Prayerfully in the awesome power and might of the Holy Spirit,
And, if your prayers included LISTENING to the Holy Spirit instead of
just claiming to speak for Him, you might actually hear something of
value.
> Andrew <><
> --
> Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> Servant to the KING of kings and LORD of lords
What I'm seeing here is "servant to my own narcissitic ego."
God requires REAL submission to His will, not just fancy boasts. And one
thing His will requires is that you be ACTUALLY truthful, not just make
vain boasts about being truthful while promulgating falsehoods to butter
up your own ego.
If you ever want to be a real exorcist, you need to wake up and smell the
fundamentalist sulphur.
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
GOD is amazing.
Many thanks, much praise, and all the glory to GOD for HIS compelling
you to be an unwitting accomplice to flushing satan down the toilet.
May HE bless you in HIS mighty way making you healthier (hungrier)
than ever:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/PressReport
Prayerfully in Jesus' awesome love,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Cardiologist
TC
>
> - Show quoted text -
How's the job?
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Just advised a patient to stop low-carb dieting unless she wants to
die prematurely.
Be hungry... be healthy... be happy... be blessed:
http://TheWellnessFoundation.com/PressRelease
Prayerfully in Jesus' awesome love,
BuddyThunder
Oh stop it! You're being silly.
BuddyThunder
BAAAHAHAHA!!
Holy saviour on a stick, Batman! You're right!
TC
Then you show a careless disregard by practising in a field that you
are neither trained for nor "board certified", nor even have a basic
understanding of.
You are a 2-lb diet crank and a failed un-employed cardiologist. Not
to mention a religious nutbar and a fraud.
You have no standing whatsoever to be giving anyone advise on
anything.
Cary Kittrell
Not only that, he misspelled "ghoul".
-- cary
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Without the LORD, your fantasies are meaningless (Ecclesiastes).
This simply shows that the Holy Spirit is absolutely right to convict
you:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts
parsi...@gmail.com
While you're at it, how about asking him to have a functioning brain?
>
> > Now. You're frightening.
>
> "Fear not those who can kill the body and do nothing more. Fear HIM
> Who can destroy the soul." -- LORD Jesus Christ.
`
I mean that YOU are frightening. Crackpots like you are likely to go
postal...
Chris Malcolm
The point, which has clearly flown over your numberless head, is that
her statement isn't inaccurate if you bother to do the arithmetic. The
only arguments which can make it appear inaccurate are those erected
by people who either don't bother with the arithetic, or who hope that
those they're trying to sell something to won't bother to do the
arithmetic.
--
Chris Malcolm c...@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Did that and HE's done that.
> >
> > > Now. You're frightening.
> >
> > "Fear not those who can kill the body and do nothing more. Fear HIM
> > Who can destroy the soul." -- LORD Jesus Christ.
> `
> I mean that YOU are frightening. Crackpots like you are likely to go
> postal...
Jesus' words would help you with your fear of me if you reverently
feared HIM, Who has the power to destroy your soul.
Many thanks, much praise, and all the glory to GOD for HIS compelling
you to unwittingly show that it is you who are in need of a
functioning brain.
Geoff
>
Ho! <whack>
Yo! *plonk*
I can't believe I didn't do this sooner.
magilla
<and...@emorycardiology.com> wrote:
> neighbor James216...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>
> > > Moreover, Darwin's theory of evolution as posited in his book, The
> > > Origin of Species, is dead.
>
>
> > > A theory requires support by successful predictions to keep it viable.
>
> > One usual definition of a species is a group of living things which
> > can reproduce themselves and which will not cross breed with related
> > species and produce young which will be able to reproduce. ie a
> > species is reproductively isolated from other species. Of course
> > there are other less restrictive definitions also. Using this
> > restrictive definition Dr Sheele observed a new species originate
> > clear back about 1960. Way before gene splicing and all the modern
> > stuff.
>
> > So we have a new species and a successful prediction by Darwin.
>
No, he didn't. Darwin showed that evolution by means of natural
selection happens. He also proposed that all species have one, or at
most a few, common ancestors. We now think that drift is the most
important cause of speciation, but work is still continuing.
>
> Instead what has been observed is degeneration (loss of biodiversity
> and loss of complexity) instead of Darwin's evolution:
Are you seriously suggesting that the fossil record does not show an
increase in the complexity of organisms from a billion years ago to
now?
Do you believe in a young earth?
Do you believe in a global flood?
Chris
>
> http://www.evolutionisdegeneration.com
>
> Bottomline:
>
> Darwin's Theory of Evolution is still very much dead.
>
> Be hungry... be healthy... be blessed:
>
> http://TheWellnessFoundation.com/PressRelease
>
Gantlet
"Kurt" <kurtwhee...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> My comment was in response to Susan's inaccurate statement about whole
> grains, not what is better for a T2 diabetic.
>
>
I love how some people make it look like its Whole Grains vs. Veggies.
when in truth its Whole Grains and Many Fruits vs. Fat and Protein.