food choices, omni carni herbivores, VG

Organize and arrange your garden and vegetable garden: ornamental, landscape, wild garden, materials, fruits and vegetables, vegetable garden, natural fertilizers, shelters, pools or natural swimming pool. lifetime plants and crops in your garden.
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749

Re: Food Choices, omni carni herbivores, VG




by sen-no-sen » 30/04/16, 18:36

Just a quick note about the “normal” of the bolus.
It is estimated that around 2 to 3% of people are vegetarians in France:

While in England or Germany we estimate 9% the number of vegetarians (estimates vary from 7 to 11% for England), in France we are a little less than 2%.

The worst student in Europe? Portugal with only 0,3% of the vegetarian population. However the last study in 2012 would speak of 200 vegetarians in Portugal (or 000%) against 2 in 30.

http://www.vegactu.com/actualite/carte-des-vegetariens-dans-le-monde-6921/

It is quite difficult to establish strict figures, but I think that we are approaching roughly its ratios (vegans being counted among vegetarians).

Hence this remark that I heard from my youth concerning the singularity - otherwise the abnormality - of the vegetarian practice.
It is good to note that even if 2% of the French population (on the rise however) is vegetarian..this is very, very much higher than the population of pure carnivore ... which to my knowledge and except psychiatric pathology seems to me nonexistent ... ditto I know very few people who eat raw meat.

Most of the classic food bowl consists of fruits, vegetables, cereals of all kinds and lastly meats.
So if we calculate the ratio of food by category and by country we quickly realize that we should talk vegetarian omnivorism, see from semi-vegetarianism, its trends can evolve locally over time and according to latitudes.
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538

Re: Food Choices, omni carni herbivores, VG




by Obamot » 30/04/16, 19:28

Yes, the same tendency to say the same thing has paid off on my side ... Already because for people to change their food mode, it will never take through a dramatization of awareness (except pathology requiring a special diet ...)

In reality, it would be better to classify according to the mode of digestion: putrefaction VS fermentation (there it becomes individual data, even very personal since it would be necessary to pass by an observation of the faeces) ... First we must know that we have both in us, even the strict VG will always have a part of its digestion which will not be fermentation (dixit our biochemist, one cannot go without the other, live without the other ... thus life goes ...)

And there, oh surprise, a VG mode of digestion can very well be found in someone who has a flexitarian diet. It all depends on how the person metabolizes and "how his digestive system learned to do with what he was given". This is why those who think that a"majority meatless society would be utopian"are wrong (yes, it would be entirely possible), just as those who believe that flexitarians would disappear, since it depends on which food mode (?) would suit whom (?). free choice guiding the personal will to operate as a justice of the peace of free will: but not without a preliminary education which would have to be done in our schools from an early age ... That is yet another story!

So from there we could deduce my answer from the question on milk (and we would be partly wrong)

I plussoie the answer given by Ahmed (and given in his time by Dr Kousmine) cow's milk is made to grow the calf which must reach the weight of a cow in 18 months !!! It is a superfood that should not be drunk by humans, in principle (otherwise it would be better to consume 0% ...) And ditto for human breast milk, which has all the specifics provided for breastfeeding the baby (in principle ...)

The conclusion is that: I never said that animal proteins did not have certain advantages on vegetables (since it is not because these have certain advantages on animals, that the latter would not have any some also, that the plants would not have ... tah daaah ...): for the calf it is very clear, it is the rapidity of the weight gain and therefore development of the related musculature, particularly well dosed to do this. This is especially what animal proteins bring in one go: they provide the 8 essential amino acids in a balanced way and this in a single take: if we talk about those in milk, that's it but in more complex) whereas it would be necessary to do a work of selection of different plants to achieve it otherwise, which is quite complex (but not if we eat a balanced diet, which a baby or a calf cannot do ...! For example certain proteins plants are deficient in lysine (cereals) or even methionine (legumes), which is why it would be appropriate (Janic or others will tell me if I am wrong) to combine in a VG meal a cereal (ancient) with a legume.
0 x
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538

Re: Food Choices, omni carni herbivores, VG




by Obamot » 30/04/16, 20:11

PS: of the 22 amino acids (proteinogenic >>>) which are necessary for us, there are 8 which are said to be "essential" (in reality 9), these are the ones I was talking about (these are those which cannot be synthesized by the organism).
0 x
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749

Re: Food Choices, omni carni herbivores, VG




by sen-no-sen » 30/04/16, 20:49

Obamot wrote:
cow's milk is made to grow the calf which must reach the weight of a cow in 18 months !!! It is a superfood that should not be drunk by humans, in principle (otherwise it would be better to consume 0% ...) And ditto for human breast milk, which has all the specifics provided for breastfeeding the baby (in principle ...)


What do you mean by 0% milk?
Although there has been an offensive against dairy products for some years, to date there are no studies clearly demonstrating the harmful effects of this one.
The risk benefit seems to go largely in the direction of a reasoned consumption ... especially in the land of cheese! : Mrgreen:
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538

Re: Food Choices, omni carni herbivores, VG




by Obamot » 30/04/16, 23:38

For me there is not only "reasoned consumption" but also the notion of ultra important pleasure. Having said that, we can replace a "not very healthy or unhealthy" pleasure with a "healthy" pleasure.

But be careful, there is never any ideological discourse behind what I say. For me all food modes can be suitable, as long as they are suitable without deficiency for those who have chosen them, freely chosen (and without the appearance of pathologies). So much for a useful point. I am a little less flexitarian (and more VG than before) after the WHO announcement to raise the carcinogenicity of meat to the level of asbestos or arsenic (IARC group 1: processed meats) or trichlorethylene (IARC group 2a: red meats) which is not much "better". To tell the truth, I don't buy it (not for ages) and only consume it when I cannot do otherwise, but in principle I can always accommodate myself, no one forces me ... Now like I don't want to dodge, here are the answers circulating:

1) Milk is not a drink but a complete feed for fattening the calf. It is not eligible not transformed by certain doctors, in particular those which practice the conventional medicine doubled of the orthomolecular one.

2) 0% because at least we already remove the fat, so the "bad cholesterol".

3) It is an animal product and therefore not a food eligible for human consumption by certain VG categories.

4) According to a more strict LV hypothesis, milk would be described as a harmful pathogenic source with undesirable colateral damage, as a weakening of the organism, promoting dental caries and even in combination with other factors, a source of cancers (for example exemplary, Dr. Gerson's treatment bans meats, dairy products and eggs, soy, and all animal proteins ...)

My warning being that in no case should any of these "recommendations" be made under duress, but freely consented and applied with pleasure. Otherwise it is not valid. We know of nebo-type reactions in subjects who estimated certain foods such as "good for health", but which had been imposed on them (in the associative family bosom or other) and which triggered the production of" products "by stress, in their organism and they died of it (our biochemist dixit) so I am singularly opposed to everything which would be imposed on others without reasoned prescriptions and assent of the people.

So everyone must listen to their body, be happy and have a good morale, an adapted lifestyle and exercise, then: look for the right combinations with common sense and a good food culture and change if it is not going well or if symptoms appear, So do not hesitate to consult your doctor when the idea comes to change your diet (a health check with blood analysis will reveal any deficiencies, or not ...), if possible one of those practitioners who still knows prevention / diet issues well, and who still cares about what we put on our plates.

Personally, I sometimes consume 0% milk, 0% cottage cheese (and I will consume it as long as I have not found a substitute to make an emulsion with oil in salads, Budwig cream etc. ) and also cheeses on occasion, but not at all regularly. I'm far from being an Ayatollah, but over time I focus on quality, which makes me become a little more strict without realizing it ... (I consume a lot more organic these days, but it it is better to eat non-organic but "balanced" than organic anyhow ...)
0 x
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: Food Choices, omni carni herbivores, VG




by izentrop » 01/05/16, 01:07

Obamot wrote:1) Milk is not a drink but a complete feed for fattening the calf. It is not eligible not transformed by certain doctors, in particular those which practice the conventional medicine doubled of the orthomolecular one.

2) 0% because at least we already remove the fat, so the "bad cholesterol".

Update with doctor Pascale Modaï, nutritionist in Paris.

What are the benefits of milk? What does it bring to the body?
First of all it must be remembered that milk or dairy products are essential for the body, this remains the first source of calcium. Milk is a complete liquid food. It contains, in addition to calcium, proteins, fats and carbohydrates. Without forgetting vitamins A, D, E, and K.
Can milk bring cholesterol?
Milk has very little cholesterol, especially if it is semi-skimmed.
How many dairy products is it advisable to consume daily and which ones?
It is advisable to consume three dairy products per day: for breakfast, lunch and dinner. Our body needs one gram of calcium a day. A little more during adolescence, during pregnancy and at menopause. Fruits, vegetables and some minerals also contain calcium.

Source on Plurielles.fr: 10 questions around milk

http://www.plurielles.fr/sante-forme/nu ... 3-402.html

newslaiter-2-08-a-matter-of-fat-milk-is-valuable nutrition-en.pdf
Sorry if i prefer to refer to the specialists : Wink:
0 x
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538

Re: Food Choices, omni carni herbivores, VG




by Obamot » 01/05/16, 01:59

No I did not forget anything. It's silly to say but:

1) the link refers to a sort of TF1 blog, which is therefore not HONcode approved >>> so that does not make it a "trusted medical source". and once again this is one of your "sources of information"among the most fanciful! We find better on FaceBook : Mrgreen:

2) No animal source, because the calcium in milk as described, will be eliminated by the urine without having benefited the one who ingested it.

3) to fix the calcium in the bones, you need vitamin D, that contained in milk is not sufficient.

4) so ​​that the calcium benefits the one who ingests it requires pressure (this is the only way to fix the calcium). So physical exercise.

5) as already said, cow's milk is made specifically for calves, a food that has been stolen from cows in mass production for human consumption (for which it is not made). So, contrary to what this unverified source says, studies (Harvard University in particular) have shown that those who get calcium from plants keep a lot more and fix it much better in the bones, because it is bioavailable for man, while that of the cow is bioavailable ... for calves. A bit like consuming pure magnesium in sea salt, it will be eliminated because it is not bioavailable to humans. Now we would have to look at the metabolic questions on a case-by-case basis, but basically that's it, it's a question of qualitative choice.

6) The Harvard study is interesting in that it found that consuming two or more glasses of milk per day put people at a higher risk of injuries to the hips, neck of the femur and broken arms than those who drank "one" or "less than one" glass / s of milk per day. The bottom line is that if you want to keep your calcium in your bones, vegan sources of calcium are much more effective. And in many people, drinking milk could weaken the bones.

7) As a source of calcium of vegetable origin, there are for example black beans (black-eyed peas) which contain 370mg / 100gr (see what I say about legumes ...) White flageolet beans almost the same (382 mg) In equal amounts, soy milk contains 2x more calcium! (Even if it is discussed, it is.)

I do not see anywhere mention of all this in your link, you should indeed be wary of non-specialists of which you are part!

The specialists do not omit the basic rules! I specify that I am HONcode approved.
► View Text
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: Food Choices, omni carni herbivores, VG




by Janic » 01/05/16, 09:05

Dede, ahmed, obamot hello
Bulk therefore:
it (milk) seems interchangeable between mammals, whether they are herbivores or carnivores
Not really, the compositions are close, but variations are the milk of other species is not always very well tolerated as inevitably less well suited.
Relatives ? Not really ! the composition of the milk of each animal is very different in conventional building elements: proteins, carbohydrates, lipids and, as you point out, a multitude of other elements like growth hormones and everything else. So each milk is adapted to the species and, to be consistent, humans should consume only their own milk and, unless you have nannies with cow udders, consumption would obviously be reduced.
It is estimated that around 2 to 3% of people are vegetarians in France:
These figures are very exaggerated (2 to 3% according to the organizers, 0.02% according to the police !!!!). Indeed are often considered as VG as much those who are really and thoroughly, as occasional practitioners, like flexitarians, but also those who do not consume red meat, but consume the rest: white meat, fish and others. If we could count real VGs (by experience based on my environment that of an average city of a few tens of thousands of inhabitants), we would find at most a few tens, which leads us far from a few% , at most a few per thousand.
First you should know that we have both in us, even the strict VG will always have a part of its digestion which will not be fermentation (dixit our biochemist, one cannot go without the other, live without the other ... so life goes ...)
I think this thinking is right and wrong at the same time. Indeed, part of the VG is VGR, that is to say consuming foods that can quickly putrefy with a lazy intestinal transit since a putrefaction is linked to the transit time and heat. smells during eliminations). For a VGL, it is rather the opposite since plant consumption (mainly herbs) requires a much longer digestion time than the human intestinal system allows. We are more at risk (with too many leafy vegetables) of a deficiency due to lack of assimilation of nutrients (if it were exclusive of course)
This is especially what animal proteins bring in one go: they provide the 8 essential amino acids in a balanced way and this in one take:
Here again, this discourse must be qualified: on which referent was estimated that these eight amino acids were found in a balanced way. The referent taken was the egg, which is far from a good reference, it is like taking cow or elephant milk as a reference. So balanced: no! Present: yes!
if we are talking about those in milk, that's it but more complex) whereas it would be necessary to do a work of selection of different plants to achieve it otherwise, which is quite complex (but not if we eat balanced, this what a baby or a calf can't do ...!
I, too, went through this phase of measurements of this or that element present or not, and I quickly gave up because no consumer can live with pods verifying the RDA, the presence or absence, it is necessary to leave that to nutritionists who play with and who do not make people healthier, hence:
For example, certain vegetable proteins are deficient in lysine (cereals) or even methionine (legumes). This is why it would be appropriate (Janic or others will tell me if I am wrong) to combine in a VG meal a (ancient) cereal with a legume.
Unfortunately it is, if not false, at least unrealistic. In fact, no consumer is able to know if such an element is present in his food (it's just good for laboratory rats), its quantity, its assimilability, etc. Besides, the measurements made are, in general , on cereals such as legumes and the rest also elsewhere (for example) coming from industrial agricultural production whose food quality (in its components) is not taken into account. We often find differences of 40% between industrial and organic.
I have, on the one hand, a table of the components of organic cereals and the necessary intakes supposed per kg of weight and these 8 amino acids are there in sufficient quantity, see beyond.
The idea of ​​combining different foods for their compounds is to play the laboratory rat (the biologist there). It is not enough to add quantities to others to obtain a total. It is the organic machine which will make its choice and, according to circumstances which escape us, will make their profit from certain mixtures and additions or on the contrary not to assimilate them because of these mixtures. For example the intake of calcium by dairy products which will generate decalcifications such as osteoporosis and which the intake of vit D (synthetic of course) will not improve but rather worsen.
PS: out of the 22 amino acids (proteinogenic >>>) which are necessary for us, there are 8 which are said to be "essential" (in reality 9), these are the ones I was talking about (these are the ones that cannot be synthesized by the body).
Again this is very theoretical when the synthesis or not since, again, these measurements are made on "omni" whose digestive mechanisms are different from VGL (not the same juices, not the same quantities, by the same pH etc ...)
This same discourse is held concerning B12 that the human organism could not synthesize (which is probably the case in "omnies", but reality shows that the VGL examined (which have no B12 intake neither natural nor have a sufficient level of B12 throughout their lifespan (AADDC study report). On a personal level, I am supposed to have had no intake for more than 46 years while the usual stocks, without external contribution, would be exhausted in 2 years.
Our organizations are " studied for! "When we respect, at best, its mechanisms by a suitable food mode (therefore VGL) and sufficient physical activity for its oxygen supply without which the machine" it will not work as well now! »
Personally I sometimes consume 0% milk, 0% cottage cheese (and I will consume it as long as I have not found a substitute for making an emulsion with oil in salads, Budwig cream etc. )
The question of 0% is a fad. Indeed aware that dairy products have many drawbacks, the solution (economic and industrial first) is to remove from a product the nasty component that is problematic. So we fall into “diets” without cholesterol, gluten, without everything and anything, rather than saying that if it is not suitable, it is not by unbalancing it that it will improve things (in reality there is the appearance of a better that will pay for itself some time later)
For the emulsion with this addition, personally, I have not noticed or read that this is a necessity (again the respected organization will make its own emulsion (or rather what takes its place) if it needs exist (I do not dispute that this could be a useful passage in certain circumstances, I have not studied this particular point, there are lots of schools on nutrition with many differences)
and also cheeses on occasion, but not at all regularly. I am far from being an ayatollah, but over time I put on the qualitative, which makes me become a little more strict without noticing ...
Exactly, it is not the intellect which intervenes in this case, but the intelligence of the body which knows (when its mechanisms are less and less distorted) recognize what is most beneficial to it in what is brought to it and therefore reduce or even abandon what is least profitable. (sen no sen would invoke thermodynamics!)
For the anecdote, a person of my acquaintance, very fat meaty, preferred after a year or so the vegetable preparations to the meats to which he was so attached gustatively. Phenomenon that I met during the follow-up of meaty people turning to a VG by taste.
(I consume a lot more organic these days, but it is better to eat non-organic but "balanced" than organic anyhow ...)
There, the fan of bio that I am does not share this point of view. It is like asking whether it is better to be blind with the right eye or the left eye. There is no choice to make, better to have both eyes even helped by glasses!
However, it is true that the ORGANIC follows a fashion effect too, where to consume it is cool, without nutritional approach so far, but it does not last!
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538

Re: Food Choices, omni carni herbivores, VG




by Obamot » 01/05/16, 17:38

The main point is voluntary assent for this or that food bowl. If on the contrary there is some form of "resistance", it will change the way it is digested, that was my main plea. The rest is secondary and HS for the answer given to dede2002, since there is no this problem during breastfeeding. CQFD (lol) One more point, with regard to the breastfeeding of calves, certainly the milk contains animal proteins but no prions, therefore no risk of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (no crisis of mad calves to the horizon). : Cheesy:

Janic wrote:
Obamot wrote:It is estimated that around 2 to 3% of people are vegetarians in France:
These figures are very exaggerated (2 to 3% according to the organizers, 0.02% according to the police !!!!). Indeed are often considered as VG as much those who are really and thoroughly, as occasional practitioners, like flexitarians, but also those who do not consume red meat, but consume the rest: white meat, fish and others. If we could count real VGs (by experience based on my environment that of an average city of a few tens of thousands of inhabitants), we would find at most a few tens, which leads us far from a few% , at most a few per thousand.

Honestly, I find that the stats of the LV stats (all trends combined) are very undervalued. It is only when you want to do studies that you notice it (proof that they existed before they were listed). There are two reasons for this:
- economic, not everyone can afford to eat meat and nothing that this segment of the population must represent a significant percentage.
- it is highly unlikely that meat is suitable for everyone, only 2 or 3% in this context is very little, any epistemological study would show larger standard deviations for subjects in contact with any which pathogen (think of allergic to meat products, in particular) - in short, in view of what the dozens and dozens of credible studies on the carcinogenicity of meat and collected by the WHO have revealed, it is clear that we have here a "product" potentially toxic for humans, I would eat my hat if, following prolonged exposure, there were no more spontaneous releases from the exposed consumers [...] there are some necessarily, in whom it is not suitable, who will spontaneously not consume this "type of product" without declaring themselves to be VG - therefore statistically speaking they do not appear, but we must rather be in a range between 10 and 20% of the population who do not consume meat (whatever the reason) without even having wondered if they classified themselves VG or not, de facto they do not like and they are not in the stats (amha.)
- there is also this unhealthy propensity that some people have to bias the statistics, to make them more "suitable" in comparison with neighboring states ... (my diploma teacher who was responsible for "official" statistics in my city , dixit ....)

Janic wrote:
Obamot wrote:First you should know that we have both in us, even the strict VG will always have a part of its digestion which will not be fermentation (dixit our biochemist, one cannot go without the other, live without the other ... so life goes ...)
I think this thinking is right and wrong at the same time. Indeed, part of the VG is VGR, that is to say consuming foods that can quickly putrefy with a lazy intestinal transit since a putrefaction is linked to the transit time and heat. smells during eliminations). For a VGL, it is rather the opposite since plant consumption (mainly herbs) requires a much longer digestion time than the human intestinal system allows. We are more at risk (with too many leafy vegetables) of a deficiency by lack of assimilation of nutrients (if it were exclusive of course).

Yes but since we cannot not have both in us, even as a strict VG (otherwise we can die he told me, since we live thanks to the balance between the two even if one dominates over the other: that's how life goes. And also so many equilibria - even if not quite comparable - like acid / base, blood pH etc.)

Janic wrote:
Obamot wrote:This is especially what animal proteins bring in one go: they provide the 8 essential amino acids in a balanced way and this in one take:
Here again, this discourse must be qualified: on which referent was estimated that these eight amino acids were found in a balanced way. The referent taken was the egg, which is far from a good reference, it is like taking cow or elephant milk as a reference. So balanced: no! Present: yes!

I was not talking about animal products but breast milk when answering the dede2002 question. If you want, we are talking about the needs of the organism here, it is theory. After with the food, what people make of it and how they manage it it's been years that I ask you to make a thread on it (lol), but I agree that nature and a little common sense it's going very well (if certain qualitative conditions are met, however).

Janic wrote:
Obamot wrote: if we are talking about those in milk, that's it but more complex) whereas it would be necessary to do a work of selection of different plants to achieve it otherwise, which is quite complex (but not if we eat balanced, this what a baby or a calf can't do ...!
I, too, went through this phase of measurements of this or that element present or not, and I quickly gave up because no consumer can live with pods verifying the RDA, the presence or absence, it is necessary to leave that to nutritionists who play with and who do not make people healthier, hence:

Dito (last para of previous answer).

Janic wrote:
Obamot wrote:For example, certain vegetable proteins are deficient in lysine (cereals) or even methionine (legumes). This is why it would be appropriate (Janic or others will tell me if I am wrong) to combine in a VG meal a (ancient) cereal with a legume.
Unfortunately it is, if not false, at least unrealistic. Indeed no consumer is able to know if such an element is present in his food (it's just good for laboratory rats), its quantity, its assimilability, etc ...

Dito, from theory to practice ... (same paragraph.)
It's funny, your answers make me pass for an ideologue of VG food when I am not at all :P :D : Cheesy:

On the other hand, it is correct to say that certain proteins are deficient in certain amino acids.
This is where a clear answer from you would have been helpful in combining "1 legume + 1 associated cereal" in the same meal: rhôoooo did not even answer you : Mrgreen:

Janic wrote:In addition, the measures taken are, in general, on cereals such as legumes and the rest also elsewhere (for example) coming from industrial agricultural production whose food quality (in its components) is not taken into account. We often find differences of 40% between industrial and organic.
I have, on the one hand, a table of the components of organic cereals and the necessary intakes supposed per kg of weight and these 8 amino acids are there in sufficient quantity, see beyond.
The idea of ​​combining different foods for their compounds is to play the laboratory rat (the biologist there). It is not enough to add quantities to others to obtain a total. It is the organic machine which will make its choice and, according to circumstances which escape us, will make their profit from certain mixtures and additions or on the contrary not to assimilate them because of these mixtures. For example the intake of calcium by dairy products which will generate decalcifications such as osteoporosis and which the intake of vit D (synthetic of course) will not improve but rather worsen.

I learned about this fact recently (benefits of organic), but doesn't "organic push" also have nutrient deficiencies? You will tell me that it is always better than non-organic.

Therefore, it is difficult to find "healthy" organic sources of supply. Because the local organic supermarket also needs to sell and therefore it will provide itself with organic products at a lower cost, from Spain or Portugal, in extensive cultivation like non-organic, and there .... (sold in bulk , it's not marked on the carrots where they come from ...)

Janic wrote:
Obamot wrote:PS: out of the 22 amino acids (proteinogenic [see my link]) which are necessary for us, there are 8 which are said to be "essential" (in reality 9), these are the ones I was talking about (these are the ones that are not cannot be synthesized by the body).
Again this is very theoretical when the synthesis or not since, again, these measurements are made on "omni" whose digestive mechanisms are different from VGL (not the same juices, not the same quantities, by the same pH etc ...)

Each person has their own way of digestion, that's what I'm saying. This is different for sure, but with experience, it is not very different if it is "correct" from one food mode to another (the faeces of a healthy person must be similar in density, sausage, not odorous because wrapped in a characteristic aqueous film.)

Janic wrote:This same discourse is held concerning B12 that the human organism could not synthesize (which is probably the case in "omnies", but reality shows that the VGL examined (which have no B12 intake neither natural nor have a sufficient level of B12 throughout their lifespan (AADDC study report). On a personal level, I am supposed to have had no intake for more than 46 years while the usual stocks, without external contribution, would be exhausted in 2 years.
Our organizations are " studied for! "When we respect, at best, its mechanisms by a suitable food mode (therefore VGL) and sufficient physical activity for its oxygen supply without which the machine" it will not work as well now! »

It's not my concern, what interests me is the biocompatibility of different dietary modes between them (having proven themselves) like ortho medicine (Linus Pauling, Budwig) and more specifically Kousmine, with Seignalet or Gerson (always on a theoretical level) and also to better understand / learn and avoid certain risks ...

Janic wrote:
Obamot wrote:Personally I sometimes consume 0% milk, 0% cottage cheese (and I will consume it as long as I have not found a substitute for making an emulsion with oil in salads, Budwig cream etc. )
The question of 0% is a fad. Indeed aware that dairy products have many drawbacks, the solution (economic and industrial first) is to remove from a product the nasty component that is problematic. So we fall into “diets” without cholesterol, gluten, without everything and anything, rather than saying that if it is not suitable, it is not by unbalancing it that it will improve things (in reality there is the appearance of a better that will pay for itself some time later)
For the emulsion with this addition, personally, I have not noticed or read that this is a necessity (again the respected organization will make its own emulsion (or rather what takes its place) if it needs exist (I do not dispute that this could be a useful passage in certain circumstances, I have not studied this particular point, there are lots of schools on nutrition with many differences)

What does not change is that, for example, linseed oil is hepatotoxic (but not an emulsion which helps assimilation).
What does not change is that with age we metabolize less well (general) hence the interest of the emulsion which overcomes difficult metabolic passages (Dr. F. Besson dixit.)
Hence the interest of an emulsion, but which must remain light for the liver (omelet, mayonnaise, too much is too much and has the opposite effect.)

Janic wrote:
Obamot wrote:and also cheeses on occasion, but not at all regularly. I am far from being an ayatollah, but over time I put on the qualitative, which makes me become a little more strict without noticing ...
Exactly, it is not the intellect which intervenes in this case, but the intelligence of the body which knows (when its mechanisms are less and less distorted) recognize what is most beneficial to it in what is brought to it and therefore reduce or even abandon what is least profitable. (sen no sen would invoke thermodynamics!)
For the anecdote, a person of my acquaintance, very fat meaty, preferred after a year or so the vegetable preparations to the meats to which he was so attached gustatively. Phenomenon that I met during the follow-up of meaty people turning to a VG by taste.

8)
0 x
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: Food Choices, omni carni herbivores, VG




by izentrop » 01/05/16, 18:33

Calcium from milk is good for the bone: an inconvenient truth! By Léon Guéguen - SPS n ° 283, October 2008

It is indeed a well established and universally accepted truth and not a received idea but, for a few years, milk detractorsand dairy products, including several medical gurusand especially a particularly virulent scientific journalist, try to pass it off as such. The dairy industry is pilloried, like scientific experts who dare to extol the virtues of dairy products. This bad rumor is complacently amplified through its strong media coverage (books, articles, broadcasts, etc.), suggesting that calcium from dairy products would even increase the risk of osteoporosis and bone fractures!

I evades teleological considerations or established facts such as "cow's milk is made for calves but not for humans" ...
Are dairy products a very good source of bioavailable calcium?

Attacks on the undeniable calcium advantage of milk and dairy products relate primarily to the fact that calcium can be found in other foods and that the good bioavailability of calcium from milk would be a preconceived idea.The calcium of dairy products in general represents in France about two thirds of the calcium consumed et other common foods high in calcium are rare. These are the leaves of some cruciferous plants (some cabbage but not all), dried fruits and other almonds, small fish with bones, some calcium mineral waters.
As for intestinal absorbability, it is well known that certain plant components (phytic acid from seeds, oxalic acid from certain vegetables such as spinach, pectins and polyphenols from fruits, etc.)decrease it considerably, like that of other minerals and trace elements. Only the leaves of certain cruciferous plants (kale, broccoli) escape this handicap. Why pretend otherwise?

http://www.pseudo-sciences.org/spip.php?article1018
Anyway ... Quite the opposite of your speech, Obamot and I prefer this version of health professionals.

Besides, it's usually semi-skimmed milk that people consume, not pure cow's milk like the little calf : roll: . I looked on the label of the one I eat, it says 1% saturated fat.

Depending on the amount consumed, it will not necessarily make bad cholesterol (LDL), because the liver makes 75% and only 25% comes from food.
The important thing is to keep a correct LDL / HDL balance, because HDL (good cholesterol) is responsible for picking up excess LDL.
0 x

Back to "Garden: landscaping, plants, garden, ponds and pools"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 104 guests