Re: What to say to nay-sayers? (long)

[Guest guest]

Albina,

The first thing I would point out to your friend is that what is important

is not how solid the fat is at room temperature. It is how solid the fat is

at body temperature. This will tell you how the fat will behave inside your

body.

Animal fat is solid at body temperature. If it weren't, the fat in our

bellies and on our thighs would dissolve into a puddle and settle at the

bottom of our feet. To stay under the skin of an animal, animal fat has to

stay solid at 98.6.

Virgin Coconut Oil turns into pure liquid beginning at 78 degrees F. By the

time it hits body temperature it has long since melted into a clear liquid

that could not possibly clog the arteries. As a matter of fact, VCO

actually dissolves hard, stuck things inside the body. Your friend can try

it on an encrusted deposit on the surface of her skin, or on the wax inside

of her ears. In fact, the wax inside my ears has dissolved since I started

VCO just by eating it. As a result, my hearing is dramatically improved.

She can also try it by using it instead of turpentine to dissolve oil-based

paint (which is, in fact, oxidized, polyunsaturated fat).

This is why the tests on animal fat are not adequate to predict the health

value of coconut oil or other vegetable saturated fats such as palm oil.

Their behavior is dramatically different. The reverse is also true: people

shouldn't assume that, because VCO is good, then " saturated fat " in general

is good and they can start diving into animal products.

These macronutrient categories come from biochemical, modern-science

abstractions and are not useful for understanding the body, which works

according to different rules.

So, here's your factoid: what matters is how the fat behaves at body

temperature, not room temperature.

Better still, print out this e-mail and show it to her. She is welcome to

write to me.

Blessings,

Nina

What to say to nay-sayers? (long)

Hello, I'm new here :-)

Some background to my question: I have been using VCO for about a

month. My best friend, who just came back from Wyoming and crashed at

my apartment for a couple nights, completely freaked out when she saw

me putting it in my morning oatmeal. We have discussed, in the past,

the different types of fats (this was a couple years ago); and how,

according to her nutrition class, the more solid a fat/oil is at room

temp, the worse it is for you, etc. etc.

So of course her reaction to me using VCO was totally predictable, and

very fanatical. " Oh my god, that's so disgusting, it's against common

sense, I can't believe you're doing that, " etc. etc. I gave her some

simple reasons (because my mom has my copy of the Coconut Oil Miracle,

or I would have let her read it)and stated the improvements I've

noticed in my overall well-being, but she still wasn't convinced.

I'm not trying to " proselytize " my friend, I certainly don't want to

shove my point of view down her throat, but I just want her to stop

freaking out about it.

I guess my question is: what are some quick and easy factoids that I

can tell her when she asks me what the heck I think I'm doing (LOL)

that, while maybe not changing her mind, will at least let her see

that I truly believe what I'm doing is good?

I also told her that Bruce Fife is a Naturopathic Doctor, and she said

" oh well I already don't believe it! " . I thought N.D.'s had to go

through even more schooling and training than regular M.D.'s. And I

know that there are other doctors out there who are VCO advocates.

What should I tell her on that count as well?

Full of questions,

-Albina Samara

[Guest guest]

Albina,

Some people are so set in their beliefs and so closed minded nothing

will change the way they think. However, if a person is open minded to

even a small degree there is hope. The best thing you can do is given

them a copy of “Coconut Cures” or “The Coconut Oil Miracle” and let them

read it. If these books don’t convince them, then nothing will. These

books lay out the facts and the medical studies that show the benefits

of coconut oil. They also contain many remarkable testimonials. I have

convinced skeptical doctors, nurses, and nutritionists by just giving

them a book. If they are sincerely interested in learning the truth,

they will look at the books. If they are not interested in discovering

truth, they will ignore it.

Bruce Fife

What to say to nay-sayers? (long)

Hello, I'm new here :-)

Some background to my question: I have been using VCO for about a

month. My best friend, who just came back from Wyoming and crashed at

my apartment for a couple nights, completely freaked out when she saw

me putting it in my morning oatmeal. We have discussed, in the past,

the different types of fats (this was a couple years ago); and how,

according to her nutrition class, the more solid a fat/oil is at room

temp, the worse it is for you, etc. etc.

So of course her reaction to me using VCO was totally predictable, and

very fanatical. " Oh my god, that's so disgusting, it's against common

sense, I can't believe you're doing that, " etc. etc. I gave her some

simple reasons (because my mom has my copy of the Coconut Oil Miracle,

or I would have let her read it)and stated the improvements I've

noticed in my overall well-being, but she still wasn't convinced.

I'm not trying to " proselytize " my friend, I certainly don't want to

shove my point of view down her throat, but I just want her to stop

freaking out about it.

I guess my question is: what are some quick and easy factoids that I

can tell her when she asks me what the heck I think I'm doing (LOL)

that, while maybe not changing her mind, will at least let her see

that I truly believe what I'm doing is good?

I also told her that Bruce Fife is a Naturopathic Doctor, and she said

" oh well I already don't believe it! " . I thought N.D.'s had to go

through even more schooling and training than regular M.D.'s. And I

know that there are other doctors out there who are VCO advocates.

What should I tell her on that count as well?

Full of questions,

-Albina Samara

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 10/16/2006 4:12:23 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,

yoganina@... writes:

I never eat flour much less refined flour,

and just about no simple sugars. I eat whole grains 3-4 times per day

I am just trying to make a list here of *good* foods...I have always thought

of whole wheat flour as being whole grain...especially if it is milled at

home....so I am thinking beans as whole grain? What are some other whole

grains...and whole wheat flour not being one of them? What does everyone have

for

breakfast? Like I mentioned before I usually eat steel cut oats...mostly

because I can get the vco and flax seed in it pretty painlessly! I did try some

ezekial cereal the other day...it has all sprouted seeds and grains...not real

tasty but is it good? I am not sure how to eat vco other than in oats...I do

not drink smoothies because of the high calorie count and just would love

some ideas on meals...

Also in your earlier posts you mentioned eating nuts as many as you

want...that just seems like too many for me! I have been very leary of salads

every

since the spinach scare...that is the kind I use to eat.

I just need more ways to know how to get the vco in my daily diet and I have

read to take like 3-4 TBS a day...is that what everyone is taking?

Thanks ...Beth

[Guest guest]

I have to disagree with you about animal fat, Nina. Animal fat is

healthy also. The human body digests solids like fat and meat. Not

like chunks of solids are put into the bloodstream when we eat foods

solid at room temperature. What is linked to heart disease is not

fat intake, but carbohydrate intake. If people eat fat, the body

turns blood cholesterol into bile to digest the fat. If one is on a

high carb and low fat diet, there are problems.

Below is an essay by Bruce Fife on heart disease.

Alobar

======================================

Are High Saturated Fat Meals Dangerous?

A Classic Example of Mumbo Jumbo Science

By Bruce Fife, ND

" One High-Saturated Fat Meal Can Be Bad, " " Saturated Fat Blocks

Beneficial Effect of HDL, " " Saturated Fat Bad for Arteries " —these are

just a few of the hundreds of headlines that rocked the world after

the publication of a new study published in the August 15th, 2006

issue of the Journal of the American College of Cardiology. This study

received instant international attention and created quite a stir

around the world. The media reported that the study provided positive

proof that saturated fat contributed to the development of heart

disease, indicating that even a single meal containing saturated fat

was harmful. To make matters worse the saturated fat used in the study

was coconut oil.

People were frightened. Many of them had been eating coconut oil by

the spoonful faithfully for some time. Now the media was abuzz with

the dangers of saturated fat and coconut oil. Anti-saturated fat

promoters proudly announced, " See we told you so. "

As soon as the news reports were broadcast I was swarmed with

inquiries. People wanted to know if there was any truth to this study.

Most felt there was something wrong with it, but many were worried

that they were damaging their health by eating coconut oil. I had to

get to the bottom of it. And I did. This is the result of my

investigation.

The study generated numerous articles blasting saturated fats and

coconut oil as harmful and dangerous. If by chance you missed all of

the fanfare, below is a typical article published in response to this

study.

A small but apparently significant study, published in the August

15th, 2006 Journal of the American College of Cardiology, shows that

eating just one high-saturated fat meal can hinder the ability of HDL

or " good " cholesterol from protecting against clogged arteries.

Fourteen healthy Australian volunteers between the ages of 18 and 40

were fed two special meals one month apart. One of the meals was high

in saturated fat while the other was high in polyunsaturated fat.

Three hours after eating the saturated fat meal, the artery linings

were unable to expand sufficiently to increase blood flow to the

body's tissues and organs. The arteries showed some reduced ability

after the polyunsaturated meal, but these results were deemed not

statistically significant.

After six hours, researchers noted that the anti-inflammatory

qualities of HDL cholesterol were reduced after eating the saturated

fat meal, whereas they improved after eating the polyunsaturated meal.

Its long been thought that diets high in saturated fat tend to clog

our arteries with plaque, putting us at increased risk of heart attack

and stroke. If this is what one meal can do in a few hours, imagine

what a lifelong diet of high-saturated fat food will do. This study

seems to show not only that the negative effects of eating certain

fats is more immediate than we thought, but also that the positive

effects of HDL cholesterol in our bodies is dependent on other

factors. And for those who promote coconut oil as a healthier kind

saturate fat, since it's a plant –based saturated fat, this study may

be a setback.

Sounds pretty convincing doesn't it? No wonder people were

frightened. If you believed the media, this study provided the " proof "

that saturated fat promotes heart disease and that even a single meal

containing coconut oil causes great harm. Now, you must keep in mind

that reporters like to sensationalize everything. In so doing they

jump to conclusions that may not be even remotely accurate. I had to

get a copy of the study to see what it was really saying. What I found

was that the news stories were blown way out of proportion. The study

in no way showed that saturated fat (i.e., coconut oil) caused or

contributed or promoted heart disease.

What happened is a classic example of biased research and media hype.

I learned long ago to question the results of any study reported in

the media. Reporters try to sensationalize everything. They love to

take information out of context or even twist it a bit to create a

startling headline. After all, shocking stories sell papers and

interest listeners. Drug companies don't help the matter any. They

feed reporters news releases that are carefully written to bring out

everything in these studies that favors or encourages the use of their

products. Drug companies work hard at perpetuating the myth that

saturated fats cause heart disease so they can sell more

cholesterol-lowering drugs.

It is interesting to note that one of the sponsors of this study was

the pharmaceutical giant Pfizer, the maker of Lipitor, the most widely

used cholesterol-lowering drug. Hmmm…I wonder if this influenced the

authors' research?

I don't have to wonder, I know it did. From the very start the

authors' displayed their anti-saturated fat bias. The study was not

set up to fairly evaluate polyunsaturated and saturated fat meals. It

was designed to throw more criticism on saturated fat and promote the

cholesterol theory of heart disease, and thus encourage sales of

cholesterol-lowering drugs.

The purpose of the study, as stated by the authors, was to investigate

the influence of saturated fat on the anti-inflammatory status of HDL

cholesterol and vascular function. The study involved 14 subjects. The

subjects were fed two special meals which were eaten one month apart.

Each meal consisted of a slice of carrot cake and a milkshake. The two

meals were identical expect for the fat content. One meal was high in

saturated fat (made with coconut oil) while the other was high in

polyunsaturated fat (using safflower oil).

The first measurements recorded involved arterial blood flow. The

concept here is that any decrease in blood flow would be detrimental

as it reduces the transport of oxygen to vial organs such as the

heart. The methods used to take these measurements are complicated to

explain and those not familiar with this type of analysis (i.e.,

reporters) would have no idea what is going on. So they must rely on

the authors' summarizing remarks.

The differences in blood flow between the saturated and

polyunsaturated fat meals were so small that they were statistically

insignificant. In other words, the difference could have been caused

entirely by chance.

The authors admit that technically there was no significant difference

in blood flow between the two groups. However, in their summary of the

study, which is what most people (including reporters) read, they

suggested that saturated fat had a less favorable effect on blood flow

even though the tiny difference was statically meaningless. They were

basically expressing their opinion. If the facts can't back up a

cherished belief then a strong opinion is the next best option.

Consequently, some news reporters made an issue out of it giving the

impression that the subjects' arteries were struggling to maintain

blood flow after eating the saturated fat meal. Why ruin a good story

with facts? Right?

The second part of the study reported on the anti-inflammatory

properties of HDL cholesterol after each meal. Here is where a lot of

rather meaningless mumbo jumbo comes in which the authors use as

" proof " of the evils of saturated fat.

HDL is often referred to the " good " cholesterol because it has

anti-inflammatory properties and carries cholesterol to the liver

where it reprocessed and flushed out of the body. The authors

extracted blood from the subjects and isolated and incubated HDL

samples. They found a higher level of pro-inflammatory ICAM-1 and

VCAM-1 molecules in the cells incubated with the HDL from the

saturated fat diet than from the polyunsaturated fat diet. This

difference might indicate that there may be a decrease in

anti-inflammatory potential in molecules by the HDL from the saturated

fat diet. But nobody really knows for sure. And we don't know, outside

of a test tube, if it makes any difference. What really goes on inside

the body? We don't know. Nobody can really tell from this data what it

means, if anything. What we have here is mumbo jumbo

science—questionable or meaningless results interpreted to fit the

beliefs of the authors.

Based on the blood flow measurements, which were insignificant, and

the meaningless difference in anti-inflammatory potential of HDL the

authors flat out state that consumption of saturated fat promotes

heart disease. This is clearly evident in the title of their article

" Consumption of Saturated Fat Impairs the Anti-Inflammatory Properties

of High-Density Lipoproteins and Endothelial Function. " That pretty

clearly states that saturated fats promote heart disease. Yet, when

you examine the data, this study doesn't provide a shred of evidence

to support that conclusion.

What's really interesting about this study is that it can be

interpreted in two different ways. We've just seen the authors'

interpretation, but you can also interpret it as proving that

saturated fat (coconut oil) is more protective against heart disease

than polyunsaturated fat (safflower oil). Let me show you.

The blood flow measurements showed that the percent of change in the

polyunsaturated fat group was slightly better than that of the

saturated group. This point was stressed by the authors to suggest the

polyunsaturated meal was superior, even though the difference was

insignificant. However, blood flow measurements were actually greater

in the saturated fat group at every measured point during the study.

Using the same biased logic as the authors, we can say that the

saturated fat group had better blood flow readings thus indicating

that it is more protective against heart disease.

The measurement of the anti-inflammatory potential of the HDL can also

be viewed in a pro-saturated fat context. HDL is the cholesterol that

is returning to the liver. Since HDL is bringing cholesterol back to

the liver for reprocessing and elimination wouldn't that mean this

cholesterol will be processed out of the body? In other words, the

saturated fat diet has caused HDL to clean up or gather up more

pro-inflammatory cholesterol and remove it from the body than

polyunsaturated fat. To illustrate my point, let's say two garbage

trucks, truck A and truck B, go out onto the city streets to pick up

trash. At the end of the day truck A has twice as much trash as truck

B. Which one did a better job of cleaning up the city? Obviously truck

A because it picked up and removed more trash. Now according to

cholesterol theory advocates HDL is like these dump trucks, picking up

cholesterol and pulling it out of the arteries and dumping it in the

liver for removal. The saturated fat meal represents truck A, the one

that gathered the most garbage. Therefore, the saturated fat meal

reduced the potential for clogged arteries better than the

polyunsaturated fat meal.

There is one more item which the authors of the study conveniently

forgot to mention. And this is really interesting. According to the

data supplied in the article the subjects who ate the polyunsaturated

fat meal had higher total cholesterol and higher LDL (bad) cholesterol

than those who ate the saturated fat meal. Now according to low

cholesterol advocates elevated total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol

are the most important factors influencing heart disease. Yet the

saturated fat meal lowered both in comparison to the polyunsaturated

fat meal. What's going on here? It seems the data is showing that

saturated fat protects against heart disease. I can see why the

authors didn't dare mention this fact. It would have destroyed their

entire argument.

So as you see, you can interpret this study to prove or disprove that

saturated fat protects against heart disease. Although most of the

evidence seems to indicate that saturated fat is more protective than

polyunsaturated fat, the authors twisted the data to support their

bias. The media, with help from the pharmaceutical industry marketing

muscle, picked up on this and blew the study way out of proportion.

It is interesting that most everyone already believes that saturated

fat promotes heart disease. The media reports " news, " meaning

information that is " new. " A study suggesting that saturated fat

promotes heart disease isn't new and, therefore, isn't newsworthy. So

why did this little insignificant study, using only 14 subjects with

questionable results achieve international attention? The reason is

simple, because it supports the agenda of the pharmaceutical industry.

Big brother gave this meaningless little study significance by

broadcasting it loud and clear. Other studies which aren't backed by

mega-industries or that show conflicting evidence don't get near the

publicity and we rarely hear about them.

Now go back and reread the news story at the beginning of this article

and see how distorted it is. Notice how the reporter twisted the

research data regarding the blood flow measurements? The news article

indicated that saturated fat prevented the artery linings from

expanding properly. It goes on to say that the polyunsaturated fat

meal " showed some reduced ability…but these results were deemed not

statistically significant. " In other words, the reporter is saying the

negative effects caused by the polyunsaturated fat were insignificant,

but those of the saturated fat were breathtaking news! What the study

really said was that there was no significant difference between the

two types of fat. What a huge difference a little creative reporting

can make!

The article also points out that " the anti-inflammatory qualities of

HDL cholesterol were reduced after eating the saturated fat meal,

whereas they improved after eating the polyunsaturated meal. " What?

The reporter must have been looking at a different study. Nowhere did

the study say that the polyunsaturated fat meal improved the

anti-inflammatory qualities of HDL. Talk about journalist license in

reporting, this reporter's license should be revoked.

The last paragraph in the story sums up the entire focus of the

article as well as the study—saturated fats, including coconut oil,

cause heart disease.

With reporting like this it's no wonder why so many people are

confused about fats. This is why you should be very careful about the

results of any study reported by the media. Since saturated fat, and

particularly coconut oil, is gaining more respectability I suspect the

anti-saturated fat industry will beat their drums even louder in

opposition. So don't be surprised to see more meaningless studies

trumpeted in the news in the future.

This website is for informational purposes only, and is educational in

nature. Statements made here have not been evaluated by the FDA.

Nothing stated on this website is intended to diagnose, treat, cure or

prevent any disease.

Copyright © Coconut Research Center, 2006

http://www.coconutresearchcenter.org/article10028.htm

================================

On 10/16/06, Nina Moliver <yoganina@...> wrote:

> Albina,

>

> The first thing I would point out to your friend is that what is important

> is not how solid the fat is at room temperature. It is how solid the fat is

> at body temperature. This will tell you how the fat will behave inside your

> body.

>

> Animal fat is solid at body temperature. If it weren't, the fat in our

> bellies and on our thighs would dissolve into a puddle and settle at the

> bottom of our feet. To stay under the skin of an animal, animal fat has to

> stay solid at 98.6.

>

> Virgin Coconut Oil turns into pure liquid beginning at 78 degrees F. By the

> time it hits body temperature it has long since melted into a clear liquid

> that could not possibly clog the arteries. As a matter of fact, VCO

> actually dissolves hard, stuck things inside the body. Your friend can try

> it on an encrusted deposit on the surface of her skin, or on the wax inside

> of her ears. In fact, the wax inside my ears has dissolved since I started

> VCO just by eating it. As a result, my hearing is dramatically improved.

> She can also try it by using it instead of turpentine to dissolve oil-based

> paint (which is, in fact, oxidized, polyunsaturated fat).

>

> This is why the tests on animal fat are not adequate to predict the health

> value of coconut oil or other vegetable saturated fats such as palm oil.

> Their behavior is dramatically different. The reverse is also true: people

> shouldn't assume that, because VCO is good, then " saturated fat " in general

> is good and they can start diving into animal products.

>

> These macronutrient categories come from biochemical, modern-science

> abstractions and are not useful for understanding the body, which works

> according to different rules.

>

> So, here's your factoid: what matters is how the fat behaves at body

> temperature, not room temperature.

>

> Better still, print out this e-mail and show it to her. She is welcome to

> write to me.

>

> Blessings,

> Nina

>

[Guest guest]

Alobar, I have a yes-and-no answer to your argument here. On the one hand,

it is surely true that saturated fat has taken the heat for the animal

protein that usually goes with it. It infuriates me that they study milk

products, chicken fat and so forth and report the results as " saturated

fat " - as I have argued before. On the other hand, the correlations of

animal flesh intake with disease are high in almost every controlled study

for a wide variety of diseases. As far as carbohydrates, again, I think

this is a misleading category coming from biochemical science, rather than

reality. What kind of carbohydrates? For example, refined flour raises the

insulin danger, but whole grains lower it. Their effects on the body are

opposite. Take me, for example - I never eat flour much less refined flour,

and just about no simple sugars. I eat whole grains 3-4 times per day. My

triglycerides are always around 55, which is extremely low. High

triglycerides correlate with many diseases that are tied to " carbohydrates. "

It is no better to generalize about " carbs " than about " fats " and

" proteins " . I can pass on several studies on whole grains and diabetes, for

example - the higher the whole grains, the lower the diabetes. The reverse

is true for refined grains.

You always have to consider the specific food source.

Nina

Re: What to say to nay-sayers? (long)

I have to disagree with you about animal fat, Nina. Animal fat is

healthy also. The human body digests solids like fat and meat. Not

like chunks of solids are put into the bloodstream when we eat foods

solid at room temperature. What is linked to heart disease is not

fat intake, but carbohydrate intake. If people eat fat, the body

turns blood cholesterol into bile to digest the fat. If one is on a

high carb and low fat diet, there are problems.

Below is an essay by Bruce Fife on heart disease.

Alobar

--

No virus found in this outgoing message.

Checked by AVG Free Edition.

Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.4/477 - Release Date: 10/16/2006

[Guest guest]

If as many nuts as you want is too much, then that's not how many nuts you

want! :-))

Eat the whole wheat flour if you like, I'm just suggesting that if you are

concerned about your weight, cutting down on flour products can be a good

way to do it. The yeast in the bread can also bloat you out and help you

hang onto pounds.

You can always blanche your vegetables quickly to destroy bacteria. But

that spinach scare, in fact, came from runoff from a dairy farm ... last I

heard. The sprouted grain breads are fine, if you can digest them (I have

trouble with that).

Nina

Re: What to say to nay-sayers? (long)

In a message dated 10/16/2006 4:12:23 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,

yoganina@... writes:

I never eat flour much less refined flour,

and just about no simple sugars. I eat whole grains 3-4 times per day

I am just trying to make a list here of *good* foods...I have always

thought

of whole wheat flour as being whole grain...especially if it is milled at

home....so I am thinking beans as whole grain? What are some other whole

grains...and whole wheat flour not being one of them? What does everyone

have for

breakfast? Like I mentioned before I usually eat steel cut oats...mostly

because I can get the vco and flax seed in it pretty painlessly! I did try

some

ezekial cereal the other day...it has all sprouted seeds and grains...not

real

tasty but is it good? I am not sure how to eat vco other than in oats...I

do

not drink smoothies because of the high calorie count and just would love

some ideas on meals...

Also in your earlier posts you mentioned eating nuts as many as you

want...that just seems like too many for me! I have been very leary of

salads every

since the spinach scare...that is the kind I use to eat.

I just need more ways to know how to get the vco in my daily diet and I

have

read to take like 3-4 TBS a day...is that what everyone is taking?

Thanks ...Beth

[Guest guest]

>

>

> In a message dated 10/16/2006 4:12:23 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,

> yoganina@... writes:

>

> I never eat flour much less refined flour,

> and just about no simple sugars. I eat whole grains 3-4 times

per day

>

Beth

I eat porridge every morning with a tablespoon of vco stirred in. I

put it on homemade wholemeal bread at lunch time 1 tablespoon and

have it with a healthy soup or salad and fish such as mackeral. You

can stir it into coffee if you like creamy oily coffee, I don't.

You can make a coconut milk smoothie so you get oil from that as

well. Stir it into soups, rice, use it in baking. I roast a

selection of vegetables in it. I fry eggs with it. It is very

versatile and just use instead of marg or other oils, and it doesn't

turn into nasty fats when cooked. Don't use it in the microwave

though as it ruins the healing qualities of it apparently.

I put a bowl of coconut milk in the fridge the other day and it was

like a creamy dessert. It goes to hard in the freezer. I made

popsicles the other day with the milk but they were hard to remove

from mould. Just use your imagination and you can easily get 3 to 4

tablespoons into your diet.

Sally>

> I am just trying to make a list here of *good* foods...I have

always thought

> of whole wheat flour as being whole grain...especially if it is

milled at

> home....so I am thinking beans as whole grain? What are some

other whole

> grains...and whole wheat flour not being one of them? What does

everyone have for

> breakfast? Like I mentioned before I usually eat steel cut

oats...mostly

> because I can get the vco and flax seed in it pretty painlessly!

I did try some

> ezekial cereal the other day...it has all sprouted seeds and

grains...not real

> tasty but is it good? I am not sure how to eat vco other than in

oats...I do

> not drink smoothies because of the high calorie count and just

would love

> some ideas on meals...

>

> Also in your earlier posts you mentioned eating nuts as many as

you

> want...that just seems like too many for me! I have been very

leary of salads every

> since the spinach scare...that is the kind I use to eat.

>

> I just need more ways to know how to get the vco in my daily diet

and I have

> read to take like 3-4 TBS a day...is that what everyone is taking?

>

> Thanks ...Beth

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

>Beth

You seem very confused on what to eat. Generally, if it ain't been

messed around with ie processed, ready packaged meals then it's ok

to eat. Avoid white goods, flours, breads, pastas, rice etc, swop

to wholegrain or wholewheat equivalent, such as wholegrain basmanti

rice. It depends on whether you want to embrace this low carb way

of eating. I personally don't. Eat plenty fresh fruit and veg, a

bit of meat and fish if your not vegetarian, eggs, nuts, seeds. It

may be good idea to see if your allergic to anything because if so

that should be eliminated. Take you temperature you may have

sluggish thyroid if its below normal, if so vco will boost that. If

you have candida or yeast problems you would have to give up bread

and sugars. As nobody knows all your health problems it is

difficult to advise because everybody has there own issues to deal

with.

> Sally

> In a message dated 10/16/2006 4:12:23 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,

> yoganina@... writes:

>

> I never eat flour much less refined flour,

> and just about no simple sugars. I eat whole grains 3-4 times

per day

>

>

> I am just trying to make a list here of *good* foods...I have

always thought

> of whole wheat flour as being whole grain...especially if it is

milled at

> home....so I am thinking beans as whole grain? What are some

other whole

> grains...and whole wheat flour not being one of them? What does

everyone have for

> breakfast? Like I mentioned before I usually eat steel cut

oats...mostly

> because I can get the vco and flax seed in it pretty painlessly!

I did try some

> ezekial cereal the other day...it has all sprouted seeds and

grains...not real

> tasty but is it good? I am not sure how to eat vco other than in

oats...I do

> not drink smoothies because of the high calorie count and just

would love

> some ideas on meals...

>

> Also in your earlier posts you mentioned eating nuts as many as

you

> want...that just seems like too many for me! I have been very

leary of salads every

> since the spinach scare...that is the kind I use to eat.

>

> I just need more ways to know how to get the vco in my daily diet

and I have

> read to take like 3-4 TBS a day...is that what everyone is taking?

>

> Thanks ...Beth

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I am very down on drug companies and the medical industry, but for once I

can't blame them for this attitude to VCO. Researchers notice that

epidemiologically, the countries with the highest saturated fat intake are

the ones with the most heart disease, breast cancer, diabetes, and so forth.

They search and search for how this can be. They are asking the wrong

questions and they are looking for the wrong confounders (i.e., which

factors in industrialized countries are creating this problem). They are

using reductionist science. They assume all saturated fat produces the same

effects. Because of their Cartesian, mechanistic worldview, they do not

understand the vital difference between whole plant foods, refined foods,

and animal foods, or between one whole food and another; they understand

food only in terms of its reduced biochemical components.

But I don't see this as the product of a conspiracy by huge industry, except

in the long-term perspective of clinging to Cartesian reductionism. Just my

point of view.

Nina

--

No virus found in this outgoing message.

Checked by AVG Free Edition.

Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.4/477 - Release Date: 10/16/2006