raw eggs?

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 06/08/2001 3:19:41 PM Central Daylight Time, 2moons@... writes:

.. I have had my fill of sugar...and other's people share too.

LOL I love that! I got off of sugar and felt incredibly good. However, I have fallen off the wagon and I've been like a vulture, trying to attack anything that has even the slightest amount of sugar in it. I mean I'm worse than I was BEFORE I got off it the first time! Today is my second day of my journey back into the land of no sugar, and I'm having to go through ALL that crap again......but darnit I sure wish I had licked a few more cake bowls before I decided to head down the straight and narrow once again!

[Guest guest]

Jen,

Sally recommends this in the edition of NT I have and to my knowledge has not

changed her opinion. Dr. Mercola used to recommend cooking whites but

recently changed his mind. A Vonderplantz, forget how to spell his name,

reccommends whole raw eggs.

The whites do have a glycoprotein that binds avadin, however, there is an

enormous amount of avadin in an egg yolk which most likely compensates for

it, to the point that you are very unlikely to be deficient in biotin unless

you have increased needs from being pregnant/nursing. I used to eat only

yolks raw but have recently switched to whole raw eggs because, well first,

egg whites cooked without yolks are kind of nasty (not bad if you add one

yolk to numerous whites though), but more importantly, I've realized I feel

enormously better if I eat whole raw eggs. Moreover, so many have been

saying how much they turned their teeth around on all-raw diets or raw meat

that I'm trying to consume as much of my protien raw as I can tolerate.

Also, I've just started working out, and believe the raw protein will help me

build muscle much more efficiently than cooked protein.

Moreover, liver is loaded with biotin, the one source that has more biotin

than egg whites. Eating liver once or twice a week should be good biotin

insurance. I eat a pound a week generally, though when I find a source of

kidneys, heart, and other organs I'll eat less, so I'm not too worried about

it.

I currently eat close to 2 dozen raw eggs a week. Next time I go to the

doctor's I'll see if I can get a biotin test covered by my insurance and I'll

let you all know how I'm doing.

Chris

In a message dated 2/11/03 5:54:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, je@...

writes:

> hi everyone!

> I had a ? about raw eggs

> .. someone just posted about putting raw eggs into their protein drinks

> ... my ? is when you put the raw eggs into the protein drink or whatever

> else.. do you first separate the whites??

> I've heard you should not eat the whites since they contain a glycoprotein

> (avidin) that binds to biotin and can eventually lead to biotin deficiency

> Pardon my ignorance..

> still new to all this

>

____

" What can one say of a soul, of a heart, filled with compassion? It is a

heart which burns with love for every creature: for human beings, birds, and

animals, for serpents and for demons. The thought of them and the sight of

them make the tears of the saint flow. And this immense and intense

compassion, which flows from the heart of the saints, makes them unable to

bear the sight of the smallest, most insignificant wound in any creature.

Thus they pray ceaselessly, with tears, even for animals, for enemies of the

truth, and for those who do them wrong. "

--Saint Isaac the Syrian

[Guest guest]

>>>>>>>>>>>

I used to eat only

yolks raw but have recently switched to whole raw eggs because, well

first, egg whites cooked without yolks are kind of nasty (not bad if

you add one > yolk to numerous whites though), but more importantly,

I've realized I feel enormously better if I eat whole raw eggs.

Moreover, so many have been saying how much they turned their teeth

around on all-raw diets or raw meat that I'm trying to consume as

much of my protien raw as I can tolerate. Also, I've just started

working out, and believe the raw protein will help me

build muscle much more efficiently than cooked protein.

[...]

> Chris

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Hi

I'm wondering what basis you have for this belief about raw protein.

I've seen anectodal evidence about raw protein and suspiciously vague

theoretical claims, but I'd love to be convinced there is a real

advantage. Given my lack of knowledge and general considerations of

nutrient preservation, just to play it on the safe side I currently

consume all my animal protein raw (beef, octopus, oyster, kefir, egg

yolks), but I don't have any particular convictions about it. I've

recently started discarding my egg whites because I'm already getting

more than enough protein from elsewhere and when I looked at the USDA

data I couldn't see any nutritional benefit. Beyond my general

question for you above, I was surprised that you would have this view

of protein utilization from raw egg whites since NT lists the

presence of trypsin inhibitors as a disadvantage to raw whites

alongside the biotin thing, the latter of which I understand is not

necessarily a decisive consideration. It puzzles me that I don't see

the trypsin inhibitors discussed in the endless exchanges about

biotin. I would love to find more concrete data about antinutrients

in general, especially in terms of the quantitative relationship

between length of time applying some process like soaking, sprouting,

fermenting, heating, etc, and the neutralization of a given

antinutrient. I suspect this is a very fuzzy issue that's often

treated as a binary good/bad issue.

Mike

[Guest guest]

Mike,

Sorry, but I don't have enough to back up my speculation. I've just read

that raw protein is often more usable (probably depends on the protein). I

totally forgot about trypsin inhibitors. What is trypsin anyway? I got so

much into the biotin discussion forgot all about it. I do feel better eating

raw egg whites than cooked, however. Don't know if I'll run into long-term

problems.

Chris

In a message dated 3/4/03 12:09:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, bwp@...

writes:

> HI

> I'm wondering what basis you have for this belief about raw protein.

> I've seen anectodal evidence about raw protein and suspiciously vague

> theoretical claims, but I'd love to be convinced there is a real

> advantage. Given my lack of knowledge and general considerations of

> nutrient preservation, just to play it on the safe side I currently

> consume all my animal protein raw (beef, octopus, oyster, kefir, egg

> yolks), but I don't have any particular convictions about it. I've

> recently started discarding my egg whites because I'm already getting

> more than enough protein from elsewhere and when I looked at the USDA

> data I couldn't see any nutritional benefit. Beyond my general

> question for you above, I was surprised that you would have this view

> of protein utilization from raw egg whites since NT lists the

> presence of trypsin inhibitors as a disadvantage to raw whites

> alongside the biotin thing, the latter of which I understand is not

> necessarily a decisive consideration. It puzzles me that I don't see

> the trypsin inhibitors discussed in the endless exchanges about

> biotin. I would love to find more concrete data about antinutrients

> in general, especially in terms of the quantitative relationship

> between length of time applying some process like soaking, sprouting,

> fermenting, heating, etc, and the neutralization of a given

> antinutrient. I suspect this is a very fuzzy issue that's often

> treated as a binary good/bad issue.

____

" What can one say of a soul, of a heart, filled with compassion? It is a

heart which burns with love for every creature: for human beings, birds, and

animals, for serpents and for demons. The thought of them and the sight of

them make the tears of the saint flow. And this immense and intense

compassion, which flows from the heart of the saints, makes them unable to

bear the sight of the smallest, most insignificant wound in any creature.

Thus they pray ceaselessly, with tears, even for animals, for enemies of the

truth, and for those who do them wrong. "

--Saint Isaac the Syrian

[Guest guest]

hi Mike!

I too have asked these same questions

~from my understanding... the whites do have a glycoprotein that binds

avadin thus creating biotin deficiency

some still eat them raw because they say the yolk overcompensates

jen

----- Original Message -----

From: <bwp@...>

< >

Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 9:06 AM

Subject: Re: raw eggs?

> >>>>>>>>>>>

> I used to eat only

> yolks raw but have recently switched to whole raw eggs because, well

> first, egg whites cooked without yolks are kind of nasty (not bad if

> you add one > yolk to numerous whites though), but more importantly,

> I've realized I feel enormously better if I eat whole raw eggs.

> Moreover, so many have been saying how much they turned their teeth

> around on all-raw diets or raw meat that I'm trying to consume as

> much of my protien raw as I can tolerate. Also, I've just started

> working out, and believe the raw protein will help me

> build muscle much more efficiently than cooked protein.

> [...]

> > Chris

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>

> Hi

> I'm wondering what basis you have for this belief about raw protein.

> I've seen anectodal evidence about raw protein and suspiciously vague

> theoretical claims, but I'd love to be convinced there is a real

> advantage. Given my lack of knowledge and general considerations of

> nutrient preservation, just to play it on the safe side I currently

> consume all my animal protein raw (beef, octopus, oyster, kefir, egg

> yolks), but I don't have any particular convictions about it. I've

> recently started discarding my egg whites because I'm already getting

> more than enough protein from elsewhere and when I looked at the USDA

> data I couldn't see any nutritional benefit. Beyond my general

> question for you above, I was surprised that you would have this view

> of protein utilization from raw egg whites since NT lists the

> presence of trypsin inhibitors as a disadvantage to raw whites

> alongside the biotin thing, the latter of which I understand is not

> necessarily a decisive consideration. It puzzles me that I don't see

> the trypsin inhibitors discussed in the endless exchanges about

> biotin. I would love to find more concrete data about antinutrients

> in general, especially in terms of the quantitative relationship

> between length of time applying some process like soaking, sprouting,

> fermenting, heating, etc, and the neutralization of a given

> antinutrient. I suspect this is a very fuzzy issue that's often

> treated as a binary good/bad issue.

>

> Mike

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

> Sorry, but I don't have enough to back up my speculation. I've

just read

> that raw protein is often more usable (probably depends on the

protein). I

> totally forgot about trypsin inhibitors. What is trypsin anyway?

I got so

> much into the biotin discussion forgot all about it. I do feel

better eating

> raw egg whites than cooked, however. Don't know if I'll run into

long-term

> problems.

>

> Chris

I don't have any biochem background, so I'm pretty clueless about

trypsin.

I wanted to mention that I'm aware of people who eat very large

quantities of raw eggs (even including the shell) everyday. A while

ago I came across a fascinating website (<rawpaleodiet.org>)

published by an individual who has a distinctive diet including lots

of raw eggs and meat. If I recall correctly from looking throught

the site a few months back, he makes smoothies with several whole

eggs (shell,white,yolk) in one shot. I love things that make me

question my basic premises and assumptions. (nutrient-dense food for

thought!) I hadn't really been exposed to these concepts before and I

haven't really looked into them too much yet, but it's fascinating to

learn about things that might seem extreme at first but are practiced

successfully by sensible and intelligent people. I've tried to find

some kind of balance between plant and animal, raw and cooked, etc.

It's on my list of things to do (probably later than sooner) to read

more about that raw paleo stuff, but in the meantime I'm just keeping

my eyes open for clues to all these puzzles.

By the way, while I'm referring to the above email I might as well

dip into a possibly sticky topic that has continually been on my mind

since I recently starting actively reading posts on these email

lists. Quite bluntly, I'm mystified by statements like " I feel good

[bad] eating x " . I get the feeling that most of us do a lot of

experimenting with our physical lifestyle (food, exercise,

supplementation, etc), so I wonder how a person can link their

overall state with specific foods when there could be many variables

affecting them at any given time. People seem to make lots of

changes at once, so I'm surprised at how often I see confident

statements about the effects of individual foods. Personally, I've

never seen much connection between how I feel and the specific foods

I eat, despite some pretty intense and varied food experimentation in

the past year or so since becoming health-conscious. I always felt

good when I ate SAD and I've always felt good in my various

aggressive attempts at optimal nutrition. The only change I can see

is that I now have a purely theoretical belief that it's more likely

I'm preventing health problems in the distant future. The only real

link I've seen involves quantity, the clear-cut effects of

undereating or overeating on energy, mood, etc. I can understand how

someone might detect an allergy or sensitivity to specific foods, but

how can someone assign blame or praise to specific foods in other

cases? I'm thinking especially of when a person is trying five

different ways of improving some negative condition--if the condition

improves, how can you know which thing, or combination of things, was

responsible, and what if it was a delayed effect of some older

strategy? Just thinking out-loud...

Mike

[Guest guest]

I just chatted with a retired chiropractor this morning, who was a specialist in

allergies. And he recommended rotating foods. In other words eating

something different each day: not eating the same thing two days in a row. Keep

a diary and if everytime you eat a particular thing you feel worse,

consistently, you can conclude it is not working for you. And how you feel

after eating is, in fact, a good way to determine if something is benefitting

you. There are variables. Like what did you eat the day before, that might be

lingering and adding to the negative results.

It takes time and often people on the net have been at this for years and have,

overtime, figured out what is working for them and what is not. And it is a

valid way of going about it. Animals do it this way. If something makes them

sick they don't eat it again.

Blessings

Donna

----- Original Message -----

From: Evely

Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 6:29 AM

Subject: Re: Re: raw eggs?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

By the way, while I'm referring to the above email I might as well

dip into a possibly sticky topic that has continually been on my mind

since I recently starting actively reading posts on these email

lists. Quite bluntly, I'm mystified by statements like " I feel good

[bad] eating x " . I get the feeling that most of us do a lot of

experimenting with our physical lifestyle (food, exercise,

supplementation, etc), so I wonder how a person can link their

overall state with specific foods when there could be many variables

affecting them at any given time. People seem to make lots of

changes at once, so I'm surprised at how often I see confident

statements about the effects of individual foods.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

hi Mike!

I agree with you here.... from experience I have learned that in reading

some posts they are not scientific or backed up in any way~ but rather

anecdotal/testimonial whatever

...It's hard with alot of this stuff (like with the egg question for

example) because you can't compare SUBJECTIVITY unless you're a

psychologist

~Everyone has an opinion these days... how can you compare everyone's

opinion when everyone has a different opinion??

jen

" And we have made of ourselves living cesspools, and driven doctors to

invent names for our diseases. " Plato

[Guest guest]

Can you share your egg nog recipe?

Thanks

Donna

p.s. I have eaten eggs everyday of my life that I can remember. I am 52. I

have no cellulite. My friend rarely eats eggs and has alot of cellulite. A

double, not blind study. Chuckle.

----- Original Message -----

From: Judith Alta

Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 11:39 AM

Subject: RE: Re: raw eggs?

I've eaten whole raw eggs in homemade eggnog for years.

Judith Alta

-----Original Message-----

hi Mike!

I too have asked these same questions

~from my understanding... the whites do have a glycoprotein that binds

avadin thus creating biotin deficiency

some still eat them raw because they say the yolk overcompensates

jen

[Guest guest]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

By the way, while I'm referring to the above email I might as well

dip into a possibly sticky topic that has continually been on my mind

since I recently starting actively reading posts on these email

lists. Quite bluntly, I'm mystified by statements like " I feel good

[bad] eating x " . I get the feeling that most of us do a lot of

experimenting with our physical lifestyle (food, exercise,

supplementation, etc), so I wonder how a person can link their

overall state with specific foods when there could be many variables

affecting them at any given time. People seem to make lots of

changes at once, so I'm surprised at how often I see confident

statements about the effects of individual foods.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

hi Mike!

I agree with you here.... from experience I have learned that in reading

some posts they are not scientific or backed up in any way~ but rather

anecdotal/testimonial whatever

....It's hard with alot of this stuff (like with the egg question for

example) because you can't compare SUBJECTIVITY unless you're a

psychologist

~Everyone has an opinion these days... how can you compare everyone's

opinion when everyone has a different opinion??

jen

" And we have made of ourselves living cesspools, and driven doctors to

invent names for our diseases. " Plato

[Guest guest]

>I'm mystified by statements like " I feel good

>[bad] eating x " . I get the feeling that most of us do a lot of

>experimenting with our physical lifestyle (food, exercise,

>supplementation, etc), so I wonder how a person can link their

>overall state with specific foods when there could be many variables

>affecting them at any given time.

I had (and have) the same problem. I deal with it by trying to change

one variable at a time. And by keeping a detailed food log on

the computer. You can buy food log programs -- I'm a programmer

so I had to write my own -- but basically write down the food, then

how you feel. Most of my food reactions really show up 24 hours later.

I also track carb/fat/protein content. I've been making changes slowly

over the last year.

When I dropped gluten products, for instance, I replaced all the wheat

starch with with rice or potatoes, so there was only one variable. Now

I'm experimenting with carb levels, as a separate variable. But only

changing one thing at a time. It is still hard to say exactly WHAT is

helping, since some of the changes take months to really kick in.

But it does help to avoid the things that make me feel BAD.

Heidi S

[Guest guest]

Mike-

>I always felt

>good when I ate SAD and I've always felt good in my various

>aggressive attempts at optimal nutrition. The only change I can see

>is that I now have a purely theoretical belief that it's more likely

>I'm preventing health problems in the distant future. The only real

>link I've seen involves quantity, the clear-cut effects of

>undereating or overeating on energy, mood, etc. I can understand how

>someone might detect an allergy or sensitivity to specific foods, but

>how can someone assign blame or praise to specific foods in other

>cases?

Part of the answer is that it's hard to tell, and part of the answer is

that you're a lucky bastard. <g> Not all of us felt so well eating SAD,

and when you're very sick, it's a lot easier to tell how different foods

affect your energy levels, general well-being and specific symptoms. Not

to say it's easy even then, but probably the sicker you are, the easier it

is. Another way to verify that a change has a definite effect is to undo

the change and see what happens, and then redo it and then see what

happens, and so on and so forth. That's how I've discovered without a

doubt that raw liver (raw bison liver, anyway; I haven't experimented with

other livers yet) is of enormous benefit to me: every time I stop I feel

worse, every time I start I feel better, without fail.

I wish a lot more people were like you, though, willing to take the plunge

even though they feel fine now just because they believe it'll save them

future illness. I know all too many sick people who aren't willing to make

changes.

-

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 3/5/03 3:42:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, bwp@...

writes:

> By the way, while I'm referring to the above email I might as well

> dip into a possibly sticky topic that has continually been on my mind

> since I recently starting actively reading posts on these email

> lists. Quite bluntly, I'm mystified by statements like " I feel good

> [bad] eating x " . I get the feeling that most of us do a lot of

> experimenting with our physical lifestyle (food, exercise,

> supplementation, etc), so I wonder how a person can link their

> overall state with specific foods when there could be many variables

> affecting them at any given time

I eat three dozen eggs a week. While there are many variables that

contribute to stamina, overall health, energy, etc, etc... I have very poor

digestion, and from meal to meal I can judge it, and I do believe that,

having eaten many many eggs over the last six months, many of them cooked,

many of them raw yolks, many of them raw whole, that I digest the raw whole

best, and that, I have more energy in the hours following a meal the more raw

is in it, and that raw whole eggs allow me to cook sidedishes, but beyond,

raw animal products I find better than raw plant, and raw meat better than

raw eggs, etc. I'll move on to raw liver in a few weeks ;-)

I must confess, however, that I do in large part eat raw eggs for

convenience. It takes me less than a minute to " prepare " and about one

minute to consume. Versus cooking scrambled eggs for at least five minutes

and eating them for five minutes.

Chris

____

" What can one say of a soul, of a heart, filled with compassion? It is a

heart which burns with love for every creature: for human beings, birds, and

animals, for serpents and for demons. The thought of them and the sight of

them make the tears of the saint flow. And this immense and intense

compassion, which flows from the heart of the saints, makes them unable to

bear the sight of the smallest, most insignificant wound in any creature.

Thus they pray ceaselessly, with tears, even for animals, for enemies of the

truth, and for those who do them wrong. "

--Saint Isaac the Syrian

[Guest guest]

Mercola has changed his stance on raw egg whites. He says it's okay to eat

them because the yolk compensates for the avadin binding.

I've eaten whole raw eggs in homemade eggnog for years. Two years ago our

grown son came to stay with us for a while and we really went on an egg

binge. Three of us, my son, my hubby and I, put away 15 dozen eggs in three

weeks (with my son and I eating about 75% of them) for about six months.

Before I started the binge my thighs were rough and bumpy, but today they

are as smooth and free of lumps as can be. I can only attribute it to the

eggs as increasing them is the only way we changed our diet.

Enjoy! ;-)

Judith Alta

-----Original Message-----

hi Mike!

I too have asked these same questions

~from my understanding... the whites do have a glycoprotein that binds

avadin thus creating biotin deficiency

some still eat them raw because they say the yolk overcompensates

jen

[Guest guest]

Mike wondered:

>I can understand how someone might detect an allergy or sensitivity to

specific >foods, but how can someone assign blame or praise to specific foods

in other

>cases? I'm thinking especially of when a person is trying five

>different ways of improving some negative condition--if the condition

>improves, how can you know which thing, or combination of things, was

>responsible, and what if it was a delayed effect of some older

>strategy?

For me it comes down to experience. If, over time, I realize that everytime I

eat X, Y happens, it doesn't take rocket science to figure out that X is the

culprit. Once you start to notice these things, you start to wonder if other

things that happen to you could be fixed or altered by making other changes in

the diet. If you do an elimination diet for a length of time, take note of what

effects you, how you feel, etc, then start to add foods back in, you're very

likely to find foods that trigger some things you don't like.

For example, I love sweet potatoes and parsnips, and I hadn't eaten them in a

couple of years until last month. I happily baked and fried, then chowed down.

The result? Within an hour I was sleepy, could barely form coherent thought

(thankfully my hubby had just bought Unreal 2, so I just sat and watched him

play it for a few hours), and within four hours fell into a funk that lasted a

good 30 hours. Now, I'm a depressive, have been since I was 14 years old, and

let me tell ya, when you eat something that makes you feel like you want to go

to bed and not ever get up again, it's Not A Good Thing. I'm very aware of my

cycles, and as I'm not on meds, find that the one thing that has almost an

immediate affect on my mood is food. So, it's relatively simple for me to

figure out what's doing what.

Does that kind of answer your questions?

Dryad

--

http://www.puritycontrol.co.uk - XF rec's at The Grove, updated 2/1/03

[Guest guest]

----- Original Message -----

From: " michaelantonparker " <bwp@...>

<much snippage>

> By the way, while I'm referring to the above email I might as well

> dip into a possibly sticky topic that has continually been on my mind

> since I recently starting actively reading posts on these email

> lists. Quite bluntly, I'm mystified by statements like " I feel good

> [bad] eating x " . I get the feeling that most of us do a lot of

> experimenting with our physical lifestyle (food, exercise,

> supplementation, etc), so I wonder how a person can link their

> overall state with specific foods when there could be many variables

> affecting them at any given time. >

> Mike

Hi Mike

While I can only address this for my family (me hubby) I don't really

think it is mystifying at all. We have recently given up gluten on

suspicions that we are intolerant. No doctors advice, but the guessing

of a celiac friend. Both of us were almost symptom free in only 2 weeks

(chronic stuffy heads, sleep apnia, heartburn, ovary pain, sleepy after

eating, muscle soreness, fatigue etc.) We ate out 1 time at an Indian

vegetarian rest. thinking just aviod the rice and bread. I had horrible

ovary pain for 3 days after. Hubby had indgestion very bad like old

times. Tried popcorn as a snack, bad reactions. Tried rice, bad

reactions. One by one all of the symptoms that we used to accept as

" normal " returned and usually with a vengance. Now we really know

what normal is and it is great! For us one of the greatest things in life

has been to learn to listen to our bodys needs and give it what it is

asking for or more importantly aviod what it is telling you it doesn't

want. Someone mentioned only one variable at a time, sounds like

a winner to me.

Take Care,

Adrienne

Goergia Naturals Farm

one can not always be magnificent,

but simplicity is always a possible alternative

[Guest guest]

At 02:39 PM 3/5/03 -0500, you wrote:

>Before I started the binge my thighs were rough and bumpy, but today they

>are as smooth and free of lumps as can be.  I can only attribute it to the

>eggs as increasing them is the only way we changed our diet.

>

>Judith Alta

Interesting. As a teen my upper legs and upper arms had what seemed to be

almost ingrown hairs. This coincided with buying store bought milk and eggs

which we'd been able to get from neighbors till the egg man retired and the

raw

milk wasn't legal anymore. Didn't seem to be an acne type rash. When I cut

down

on both for quite a few years it went away.

Wanita

[Guest guest]

Adrienne-

>Tried rice, bad

>reactions.

Isn't rice gluten-free? Sounds to me like it's starch that's your bane,

which is more in line with Elaine Gottschall's SCD theory than with the

gluten hypothesis.

-

[Guest guest]

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: " michaelantonparker " <bwp@u...>

> <much snippage>

> By the way, while I'm referring to the above email I might as well

> dip into a possibly sticky topic that has continually been on my

mind

> since I recently starting actively reading posts on these email

> lists. Quite bluntly, I'm mystified by statements like " I feel good

> [bad] eating x " . I get the feeling that most of us do a lot of

> experimenting with our physical lifestyle (food, exercise,

> supplementation, etc), so I wonder how a person can link their

> overall state with specific foods when there could be many variables

> affecting them at any given time.

> Mike

Hi Mike,

I think this was a very reasonable topic to broach. A few years ago

I would have tended to roll my eyes at people who made such

statements. I've had CFS for almost 10 years. Several years ago, I

went off sugar for 3 months and noticed absolutely no changes. I

also went off dairy for one month and noticed nothing.

Then I decided to try macrobiotics. My macrobiotic counselor told me

I'd soon be able to tell how individual foods affected me. I was

suspicious. I ate 98% strictly macrobiotically for 1 1/2 years. The

best thing it did for me was get me off of ALL processed foods and

sugar. So, even though I now don't think macrobiotics is a healthy

diet, it was a very " pure " diet.

After being on macro for 2 months, I could definitely begin to tell

how certain foods affected me. When I tried dairy again after months

off, I had strong negative reactions (pimples, brain fog, gas). The

1 1/2 years on macro I was pimple free. Took out dairy, pimples went

away.

But remember, a few years earlier, I'd gone off of dairy for one

month and didn't notice any changes. For me, it made a huge

difference to be on a very strict, pure diet -- and then insert foods

back into my diet to see the effect.

Same with sugar. While on SAD, I omitted sugar for 3 months and saw

no changes. After 6 months on macro, I had a bit of sugar and

*immediately* didn't feel well. That blew my mind -- I truly didn't

believe that would or *could* happen.

A lot of it is trial and error, though, because there are sooo many

variables (not just food variables, but life, stress, seasons, etc).

I get a suspicion about a certain food and then I play with it for

awhile -- taking it out, putting it back in, taking it out again,

etc...

Here's an interesting thing (to me, that is!). Dairy causes pimples

for me. Recently I began eating raw eggs. Not too long after I

started getting pimples. I couldn't be certain it was the eggs

because although 95% of the time I eat a strict diet, I do go out,

too, and don't always know ingredients. After playing around w/eggs

and no eggs, it seems (sadly) that yes eggs do cause pimples. BUT,

the interesting thing is that the pimples are of a completely

different type than the dairy pimples! It's wild. The egg pimples

come and go quickly. The dairy ones are red and sore and take a long

time to go away.

A healthy person is probably not going to have the time or

inclination to pay such close attention to their body! Sometimes I

tell myself, " I have waaaay too much time on my hands " that I notice

all of these things. But the fact is that I'm sick and I do have a

lot of time and I want to get better, so I observe and observe and

observe. It's amazing what one's body can tell one!

Here's another fascinating thing. When I went macro, the counselor

told me to stop wearing deodarant because I'd no longer need it. He

was right. (Of course, I have a sedate life.) A friend mentioned to

me that he'd read that when we are anxious, our sweat actually smells

much worse than normal. Sure enough, when I'm anxious, I almost

immediately notice strong body odor! Of course, when I used to wear

deodorant daily, I would never have noticed this. Also, I notice

when I eat out (and thus not an organic, pure diet), the next day

I'll have body odor. It lasts a day. When I stick to my " pure "

diet, I have no body odor. And I just shower every other day.

That's a bit of my experience learning how different foods affect me.

[Guest guest]

----- Original Message -----

From: " michaelantonparker " <bwp@u...>

<much snippage>

By the way, while I'm referring to the above email I might as well

dip into a possibly sticky topic that has continually been on my

mind since I recently starting actively reading posts on these email

lists. Quite bluntly, I'm mystified by statements like " I feel good

[bad] eating x " . I get the feeling that most of us do a lot of

experimenting with our physical lifestyle (food, exercise,

supplementation, etc), so I wonder how a person can link their

overall state with specific foods when there could be many variables

affecting them at any given time.

Mike >

If you want to know how your body reacts to the things you consume, I

would think you need to start by eating a good diet. After a having

the same reaction time and time again after you eat a certain thing,

I'll bet you would catch on to what your body is trying to tell you.

I used to think the same way you do. Now, I can pick up on the

slightest thing. Getting off of ALL forms of sugar was probably the

single best thing I ever did for myself. I can feel pain in my knees

and jaw immediately after consumption. Interestingly, I've recently

tried Rapadura and I didn't get that reaction. I try and pay close

attention so I know what does and doesn't work best for me. This has

been key in overcoming Fibro and CFS.

My husband doesn't have a clue how things affect his body, but as the

person that is by his side on a regular basis, I can tell you how

certain foods affect his body.

Give it time, you'll start to pick up on things.

[Guest guest]

>Isn't rice gluten-free? Sounds to me like it's starch that's your bane,

>which is more in line with Elaine Gottschall's SCD theory than with the

>gluten hypothesis.

It's not always straightforward. In Dangerous Grains (and on Dogtor's

website) there is the thought that all grain proteins can be

an issue. Some people react to the gliadin in wheat (maybe most people

do), but people also react to the glutinin. Glutinin is also found in

rice. Also, once one is sensitized to the protein, TINY -- I mean

homeopathic level tiny -- amounts of the protein can cause

reactions. And you can also react to *similar* proteins, not just

the wheat protein.

The main difference between this and Gottschall's hypothesis is

that the starch issue is purely based on dosage. That is, a tiny

bit of starch is not an issue. But when the problem is an immune

response, then tiny amounts (such as going to an Indian restaurant

and NOT eating the rice or bread, but the food likely has bits

of bread or rice protein in it), can make you quite ill.

Also, it is very common for people who are gluten sensitive

to also develop side-reactions to other foods, due to leaky

gut probably. Those often go away after awhile, though the

gluten sensitivity does not go away (again, this is in contrast

with Gottschall, who believes the problem is purely microbial).

For myself, I have to say that most grain-type foods seem

to be a bit problematic. Rice is MUCH less reactive than

wheat, but basically I feel better with neither. And large amounts

of *any* starch make me feel less than optimal -- but not

nauseated and sick like gluten does. Soaking and sprouting

make the insulin reactions a lot less of a problem, but they

don't help much if you have an immune system response.

So you have 3 issues:

1. Immune system response

2. Insulin reaction

3. Microbes (yeast, bacteria)

All are real issues. Which ones affect you is for you to discover!

>

Heidi S

[Guest guest]

I have noticed the same thing as well. Raw eggs give me an energy boost while

fried, scrambled or other forms tend to drag me down. In fact, I won't even eat

scrambled eggs as they make me almost nauseous.

danny

Creek Bend Dairy Farm

Harry & Peggy Strite

11917 Snug Harbor Lane

port, MD 21795

301-582-4135

cbdfarm@...

that I digest the raw whole

best, and that, I have more energy in the hours following a meal the more raw

is in it, and that raw whole eggs allow me to cook sidedishes, but beyond,

raw animal products I find better than raw plant, and raw meat better than

raw eggs, etc. I'll move on to raw liver in a few weeks ;-)

[Guest guest]

Heidi-

>It's not always straightforward. In Dangerous Grains (and on Dogtor's

>website) there is the thought that all grain proteins can be

>an issue.

There's an important psychological issue at work here: the gluten (and

general grain protein) theory has had a relatively easy time catching on

with mainstream types because everybody is already predisposed to believe

ill of protein, but few people are (yet) willing to admit that carbs

themselves might be a problem.

This isn't to say that these proteins aren't a problem, but you seem

unwilling to even consider that most starches might not be healthy.

>The main difference between this and Gottschall's hypothesis is

>that the starch issue is purely based on dosage. That is, a tiny

>bit of starch is not an issue.

In fact she says the opposite: the sicker you are, the more effect even a

tiny little bit of starch will have on you, which is why it's so important

to be absolutely rigorous when following her diet.

>Those often go away after awhile, though the

>gluten sensitivity does not go away (again, this is in contrast

>with Gottschall, who believes the problem is purely microbial).

Not purely microbial -- the intestines themselves sustain a lot of damage

and have to be healed.

>1. Immune system response

>2. Insulin reaction

>3. Microbes (yeast, bacteria)

But they're not separate. Bowel dysbiosis and organism overgrowth damage

the intestinal walls, in turn both impairing digestion and allowing

undigested and incompletely-digested proteins to pass through and create

immune problems. Once your immune system has been sensitized to certain

proteins that immune memory will always be there, but look at the way all

sorts of food allergies disappear once the diet is changed to eliminate

sugars, starches, refined foods, additives, and so on, and to emphasize

good meats and fats. People who were formerly allergic to beef can once

again eat beef, and the same is true for other protein foods.

-

[Guest guest]

Heidi-

I'd also like to add that the gluten theory is dosage dependent too, in

that the hypothesis is that we've gotten into more and more trouble as

we've bred our grains to have more and more gluten (and other grain

proteins; I know, I should be more precise in my language). But there's a

huge and very important hole in that theory. While it's true that we've

bred some of our grains to have much more protein, there's another recent

change in our practices which has enormous consequences: the abandonment of

proper preparation, e.g. soaking in a slightly acid medium to neutralize

anti-nutrients and partially pre-digest the starch.

>The main difference between this and Gottschall's hypothesis is

>that the starch issue is purely based on dosage. That is, a tiny

>bit of starch is not an issue. But when the problem is an immune

>response, then tiny amounts (such as going to an Indian restaurant

>and NOT eating the rice or bread, but the food likely has bits

>of bread or rice protein in it), can make you quite ill.

-

[Guest guest]

----- Original Message -----

From: " Idol " <Idol@...>

<major smippage>

>Once your immune system has been sensitized to certain

> proteins that immune memory will always be there, but look at the way all

> sorts of food allergies disappear once the diet is changed to eliminate

> sugars, starches, refined foods, additives, and so on, and to emphasize

> good meats and fats. People who were formerly allergic to beef can once

> again eat beef, and the same is true for other protein foods.

> -

Whew, clearly I am behind the 8 ball as far as understanding much of

this. I have lived on a farm for the past 10 years. Most all of the food

we eat is produced by us. We have eaten practically zero processed

foods and do not consume much in the way of sugar. No refined, little

honey and no too much fruit. As far as starches goes I don't use much

but have noticed no ill effects. (dunno what that might be if going off

then back on though) Potatoes have not been a problem (I don't think).

Eating rice again after not having it gave mild stuffy head, sure I could

live with that at times but why bother.

I don't really see how I could eat too much better (maybe more fermented)

and I would love to think that I could tolerate grains again ( we just

finished building a wood fired bread oven in Oct.) I was making some

really great sourdough, but frankly even trying on purpose to eat gluten

frightens me after accidentally ingesting some. We were under the

impression that we were eating good therefore were healthy. We have

increased the quality of our lives a million times over by just eliminating

gluten, we never saw just in how bad of shape we were until we got well.

This has been a great thread (thanks for he info Heidi) and I am so

happy to have found the list (thanks Judy) What an absolute wealth

of info there is to be had. And I are stoopid. What is PUFA?

you mentioned it in the pemmican note I just didn't ask then.

Take Care,

Adrienne

Georgia Naturals Farm

one can not always be magnificent,

but simplicity is always a possible alternative

[Guest guest]

Adrienne-

>What is PUFA?

>you mentioned it in the pemmican note I just didn't ask then.

Oh, it's just an acronym for Poly-Unsaturated Fatty Acids -- IOW fish and

vegetable oils.

>and I would love to think that I could tolerate grains again

Whether you accept the gluten hypothesis or Elaine Gottschall's theory,

grains are basically a no-no. If you were to heal completely so you could

tolerate them again it would only be short-term.

-