Guest guest Posted January 13, 2003 Report Share Posted January 13, 2003 The two books, especially MM, helped me understand why I seem to have symptoms of hyperthyroidism on the one hand and underactive adrenal on the other. I had thought it wierd before to have such variance in endocrine health, but now that I read metabolic typing it makes perfect sense. The main thing I learned from my metabolic type was that I need more protein than carbohydrate-- something I'd acquired a fear of from Barry Sears' admonitions against ketosis diets-- and that has helped me stabalize my blood sugar better. However, I don't understand Walcott's statement that I have to have more protein than fat, and it strikes me as crazy. I was a little disappointed that Walcott didn't go into the science behind the diet in more detail. Not that he didn't give evidence for the things he said, but he gave evidence and scientific explanation in particular in much less detail than, say, The Zone. In trying to eat a small snack rather than a meal before church I've been experimenting with yogurt, because I've found yogurt to keep my blood sugar stable for a bit longer than milk, presumably from the lower carb content and the fact that it's more solid (probably goes through more slowly than a liquid). I'd found that eating a chunk of butter with plain yogurt made it stable even longer, but even this usually only stabalized my blood sugar for 2 hours, 2.5 max. Including cod liver oil helps too. After finding I needed more protein from MTD I added an egg instead of a chunk of butter, and it worked great-- blood sugar kept fine for four hours. BUT, an egg and whole milk yogurt, gram for gram, have the same amount of fat as protein. This means they have TWICE the amount of fat as protein in caloric value. So MTD helped me a lot in my protein to carb ratio, but as far as fat is concnerned his recommendations can be chucked out the window. I strikes me as perfectly natural to have majority of calories from fat, considering I didn't have to add ANY extra source of fat to my snack to achive such a ratio. Chris In a message dated 1/13/03 12:29:54 PM Eastern Standard Time, wanitawa@... writes: > Looks like you talked it out full circle, from looking at > approriateness > for all types to putting your type into context to MTD & MM along with NT & > NAPD. I don't agree with 30% fat in relation to 90% protein/fat of > prehistoric > man to develop our current brain size but its a fair starting point. 10% to > a > carb type would almost eliminate avocado and coconut the main plant fat > sources > for southern latitude inhabitants prior to agriculture. > What I've found helpful with all this are the doshas and body types. I've > got > this need for bitter from coffee I'm trying to figure out The bitter need > from > chocolate is pretty much gone with the fat increase, although all cultures > had > a bitter as you mentioned. Caffeine isn't indicated for fast metabolizers, > true > but its in third place to food allergens then alcohol which poisons me worse > than coffee or chocolate. ____ " 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2003 Report Share Posted January 13, 2003 , Some of the evidence cited by the metabolic typers is GI tract lengths varying by enormous amounts-- I don't remember the figures so I'll say a factor of two. The shorter GI tracts would be indicative of a carnivore and a longer tract of an herbivore. I'm not sure exactly what to make of it. By itself it strikes me as very preliminary and inconclusive evidence, especially without seeing clear correlations of the anatomy with the particular diets (which I suppose is impossible or at least hard to investigate, considering the required *dead* state of the person being studied ). And I've had trouble finding where this preponderance of traditional low-fat diets is. So far all I've come across is the Bantu mentioned in MTD. Most other diets claimed as low-fat are usually not as low-fat as they are claimed, and almost all traditional cuisine of most cultures is pretty high-fat, at least 30%. Supposedly tropical and equatorial folks are low-fat, but I think they are just confused with less animal products, since that's where all the coconut is! If some people are really genetically programmed to get most calories from carbs and few from animal products, that is quite sorrowful and it would seemed they are doomed to a less healthful state. Even if their bodies have less requirements for some of the nutrients found in animal products (and that's an if) the nutrients in plants are always more absorbable in plant foods-- even carotenoids, such as lutein, are 8 more times absorbable in an egg yolk than in a plant. Chris In a message dated 1/13/03 1:59:46 PM Eastern Standard Time, Idol@... writes: > This is exactly what I've been wondering for quite awhile now. I've long > suspected, for example, that people who " don't tolerate " animal foods > merely have digestive impairments that need to be repaired, not some > natural need to avoid animal foods. I'm sure there's some biochemical > individuality, but as you suggest, a lot of what we're seeing today is > undoubtedly biochemically individualized disease. > > And like you, I think the idea that people's fat consumption should range > from 10-30% of their caloric intake depending on their type is ludicrous. > ____ " 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2003 Report Share Posted January 13, 2003 Deborah, My yogurt claims to have 22 grams of carbs in it; however, I don't understand how any product could have MORE carbs AFTER lacto-fermentation, which turns the carbs to lactic acid. Milk has something like 12 g. We discussed this on the list a while back, and figured it was probably because the lactic acid shows up as a carb on the simple tests, when it actually isn't. I assume that the 6g of sugar listed on my yogurt container is more reflective of the carb content than the 22 grams. Either way, plain yogurt apparently has a very low GI. And by how it keeps my blood sugar, it definitely has a lower GI than milk. At 9 grams each of protein and fat, I think the yogurt is a decent source. Chris In a message dated 1/13/03 3:46:24 PM Eastern Standard Time, mdstephenson@... writes: > > > I have just bought MTD but have not read it yet. Look forward to it. I > wanted to comment on your trying yogurt before church. I always thought it > was a great diet choice but I read in my Jan/Feb Herbs for Health Mag. that > Yogurt is commonly used as a diet food, but is 70% carbohydrates. Although > yogurt is a great source of calcium, it has low protein and fat compared to > the amount of carbohydrates it contains. They say a good alternative is > cottage cheese. I don't have any at the moment to check its carb levels. I > suspect the egg and/or fat you are adding to the yogurt is helping more than > possibly the yogurt. Deborah ____ " 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2003 Report Share Posted January 13, 2003 Looks like you talked it out full circle, from looking at approriateness for all types to putting your type into context to MTD & MM along with NT & NAPD. I don't agree with 30% fat in relation to 90% protein/fat of prehistoric man to develop our current brain size but its a fair starting point. 10% to a carb type would almost eliminate avocado and coconut the main plant fat sources for southern latitude inhabitants prior to agriculture. What I've found helpful with all this are the doshas and body types. I've got this need for bitter from coffee I'm trying to figure out The bitter need from chocolate is pretty much gone with the fat increase, although all cultures had a bitter as you mentioned. Caffeine isn't indicated for fast metabolizers, true but its in third place to food allergens then alcohol which poisons me worse than coffee or chocolate. Wanita Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2003 Report Share Posted January 13, 2003 Chris- >In short, I wonder how much biochemical individuality is the normal state of >humanity and how much it is a disease state of modern civilization. This is exactly what I've been wondering for quite awhile now. I've long suspected, for example, that people who " don't tolerate " animal foods merely have digestive impairments that need to be repaired, not some natural need to avoid animal foods. I'm sure there's some biochemical individuality, but as you suggest, a lot of what we're seeing today is undoubtedly biochemically individualized disease. And like you, I think the idea that people's fat consumption should range from 10-30% of their caloric intake depending on their type is ludicrous. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2003 Report Share Posted January 13, 2003 In a message dated 1/13/03 5:35:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, kris.johnson@... writes: > I just got Metabolic Typing, and have only read halfway thru it, but it > strikes me that often when people talk about 'protein', what they really > mean is 'protein foods' (meat, fish, eggs, etc.), which can easily have 50% > fat calories or more. Maybe that is why his fat recommendations don't make > sense. That's possible, I didn't even think of it. However, that's VERY confusing, since that's such an unprecise and unusual way to calculate macronutrients. I wonder though... what then is my whole milk yogurt? It has an equal proportion of protein and fat gram for gram... is it a protein or a fat? It's listed under his protein list, but has more fat than anything else in caloric value. 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2003 Report Share Posted January 13, 2003 In a message dated 1/13/03 6:37:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, Idol@... writes: > The metabolic typing people probably are a lot closer to reality than > D'Adamo, but I think they're just flat-out wrong on the amount of fat > people should be eating. There are so many variables that there seems to me no reason to restrict fat so much. If some one oxidizes carbs extroardinarily slow they might do well to go off grains and eat only fruits and veggies that are high in vitamin C, which would speed up the oxidization somewhat, allowing them to eat more fat, and thereby have a more balanced nutrition. In my opinion, the metabolic typing is very helpful for the ratio of protein to carbs, just that it should be kept and the fat should be raised. So, for example, they recommend 60-25-15 for c-p-f for a carb type. That person would probably do well on a 50-20-30 ratio just fine, and be within Price's 30-80% fat range while still having majority carbs. Moreover, what if this carb type were to eat a good helping of lacto-fermented veggies and drink lacto-fermented drinks in between meals? I'm sure that would help their glucose stay flowing. It seems to me that while some folks like Barry Sears offer a one-size-fits-all macronutrient ratio and subject everything else to it, the metabolic typing diet does something similar, though not as bad, in saying that, although everyone has their own ideal macronutrient ratio, everythign should be subjected to it. A carbo type may well need to reduce fat if eating a normal diet, but what if that fat was coconut fat, therefore processed more quickly, and the above recommendations to include lots of lactic acid were kept? 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2003 Report Share Posted January 13, 2003 I have just bought MTD but have not read it yet. Look forward to it. I wanted to comment on your trying yogurt before church. I always thought it was a great diet choice but I read in my Jan/Feb Herbs for Health Mag. that Yogurt is commonly used as a diet food, but is 70% carbohydrates. Although yogurt is a great source of calcium, it has low protein and fat compared to the amount of carbohydrates it contains. They say a good alternative is cottage cheese. I don't have any at the moment to check its carb levels. I suspect the egg and/or fat you are adding to the yogurt is helping more than possibly the yogurt. Deborah ----- Original Message ----- From: <ChrisMasterjohn@...> < > Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 2:26 PM Subject: Re: Metabolic Typing > The two books, especially MM, helped me understand why I seem to have > symptoms of hyperthyroidism on the one hand and underactive adrenal on the > other. I had thought it wierd before to have such variance in endocrine > health, but now that I read metabolic typing it makes perfect sense. > > The main thing I learned from my metabolic type was that I need more protein > than carbohydrate-- something I'd acquired a fear of from Barry Sears' > admonitions against ketosis diets-- and that has helped me stabalize my blood > sugar better. However, I don't understand Walcott's statement that I have to > have more protein than fat, and it strikes me as crazy. I was a little > disappointed that Walcott didn't go into the science behind the diet in more > detail. Not that he didn't give evidence for the things he said, but he gave > evidence and scientific explanation in particular in much less detail than, > say, The Zone. > > In trying to eat a small snack rather than a meal before church I've been > experimenting with yogurt, because I've found yogurt to keep my blood sugar > stable for a bit longer than milk, presumably from the lower carb content and > the fact that it's more solid (probably goes through more slowly than a > liquid). I'd found that eating a chunk of butter with plain yogurt made it > stable even longer, but even this usually only stabalized my blood sugar for > 2 hours, 2.5 max. Including cod liver oil helps too. After finding I needed > more protein from MTD I added an egg instead of a chunk of butter, and it > worked great-- blood sugar kept fine for four hours. > > BUT, an egg and whole milk yogurt, gram for gram, have the same amount of fat > as protein. This means they have TWICE the amount of fat as protein in > caloric value. So MTD helped me a lot in my protein to carb ratio, but as > far as fat is concnerned his recommendations can be chucked out the window. > I strikes me as perfectly natural to have majority of calories from fat, > considering I didn't have to add ANY extra source of fat to my snack to > achive such a ratio. > > Chris > > In a message dated 1/13/03 12:29:54 PM Eastern Standard Time, > wanitawa@... writes: > > > Looks like you talked it out full circle, from looking at > > approriateness > > for all types to putting your type into context to MTD & MM along with NT & > > NAPD. I don't agree with 30% fat in relation to 90% protein/fat of > > prehistoric > > man to develop our current brain size but its a fair starting point. 10% > to > > a > > carb type would almost eliminate avocado and coconut the main plant fat > > sources > > for southern latitude inhabitants prior to agriculture. > > What I've found helpful with all this are the doshas and body types. I've > > got > > this need for bitter from coffee I'm trying to figure out The bitter need > > from > > chocolate is pretty much gone with the fat increase, although all cultures > > had > > a bitter as you mentioned. Caffeine isn't indicated for fast metabolizers, > > true > > but its in third place to food allergens then alcohol which poisons me > worse > > than coffee or chocolate. > > > ____ > > " 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 > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2003 Report Share Posted January 13, 2003 : Couldn't the same be said for people who are guten intolerant? Marla > Chris- > > >In short, I wonder how much biochemical individuality is the normal state of > >humanity and how much it is a disease state of modern civilization. > > This is exactly what I've been wondering for quite awhile now. I've long > suspected, for example, that people who " don't tolerate " animal foods > merely have digestive impairments that need to be repaired, not some > natural need to avoid animal foods. I'm sure there's some biochemical > individuality, but as you suggest, a lot of what we're seeing today is > undoubtedly biochemically individualized disease. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2003 Report Share Posted January 13, 2003 Deborah- >I always thought it >was a great diet choice but I read in my Jan/Feb Herbs for Health Mag. that >Yogurt is commonly used as a diet food, but is 70% carbohydrates. If you make yoghurt at home, you can ferment it for a longer period of time (24 hours will leave less than 1% of the lactose remaining) and you can make it with half milk and half cream, which will reduce the amount of carbohydrate and increase the amount of fat. And it's delicious, too. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2003 Report Share Posted January 13, 2003 , That sounds like a good idea. I have gone to making raw goat milk kefir as I understand that kefir is better for you than yogurt. Can't remember why though. Also don't know what the carb, protein, fat ratio would be in kefir. It seems to do me well though as I am hypoglycemic and I don't have problems with it. Deborah ----- Original Message ----- From: " Idol " <Idol@...> < > Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 3:04 PM Subject: Re: Metabolic Typing > Deborah- > > >I always thought it > >was a great diet choice but I read in my Jan/Feb Herbs for Health Mag. that > >Yogurt is commonly used as a diet food, but is 70% carbohydrates. > > If you make yoghurt at home, you can ferment it for a longer period of time > (24 hours will leave less than 1% of the lactose remaining) and you can > make it with half milk and half cream, which will reduce the amount of > carbohydrate and increase the amount of fat. And it's delicious, too. > > > > > - > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2003 Report Share Posted January 13, 2003 At 01:59 PM 1/13/03 -0500, you wrote: >This is exactly what I've been wondering for quite awhile now. I've long >suspected, for example, that people who " don't tolerate " animal foods >merely have digestive impairments that need to be repaired, not some >natural need to avoid animal foods. I'm sure there's some biochemical >individuality, but as you suggest, a lot of what we're seeing today is >undoubtedly biochemically individualized disease. > >And like you, I think the idea that people's fat consumption should range >from 10-30% of their caloric intake depending on their type is ludicrous. >- I agree with both, . That biochemical individuality is not adaptation from our ancestors. Its the often unhealthy unadaptive result of food supply dictates and controls. Grain's role in this is becoming more and more apparent as well as fat. On fat, the way I look at it is what will 10% or 30% in good fat consumption do in comparison to SAD diets that could be all bad fats. Wanita Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2003 Report Share Posted January 13, 2003 > The two books, especially MM, helped me understand why I seem to have > symptoms of hyperthyroidism on the one hand and underactive adrenal on the > other. I had thought it wierd before to have such variance in endocrine > health, but now that I read metabolic typing it makes perfect sense. > > The main thing I learned from my metabolic type was that I need more protein > than carbohydrate-- something I'd acquired a fear of from Barry Sears' > admonitions against ketosis diets-- and that has helped me stabalize my blood > sugar better. However, I don't understand Walcott's statement that I have to > have more protein than fat, and it strikes me as crazy. I was a little > disappointed that Walcott didn't go into the science behind the diet in more > detail. Not that he didn't give evidence for the things he said, but he gave > evidence and scientific explanation in particular in much less detail than, > say, The Zone. He's probably meaning more protein foods than fat foods. See my comment below. > In trying to eat a small snack rather than a meal before church I've been > experimenting with yogurt, because I've found yogurt to keep my blood sugar > stable for a bit longer than milk, presumably from the lower carb content and > the fact that it's more solid (probably goes through more slowly than a > liquid). I'd found that eating a chunk of butter with plain yogurt made it > stable even longer, but even this usually only stabalized my blood sugar for > 2 hours, 2.5 max. Including cod liver oil helps too. After finding I needed > more protein from MTD I added an egg instead of a chunk of butter, and it > worked great-- blood sugar kept fine for four hours. > > BUT, an egg and whole milk yogurt, gram for gram, have the same amount of fat > as protein. This means they have TWICE the amount of fat as protein in > caloric value. So MTD helped me a lot in my protein to carb ratio, but as > far as fat is concnerned his recommendations can be chucked out the window. > I strikes me as perfectly natural to have majority of calories from fat, > considering I didn't have to add ANY extra source of fat to my snack to > achive such a ratio. I just got Metabolic Typing, and have only read halfway thru it, but it strikes me that often when people talk about 'protein', what they really mean is 'protein foods' (meat, fish, eggs, etc.), which can easily have 50% fat calories or more. Maybe that is why his fat recommendations don't make sense. Kris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2003 Report Share Posted January 13, 2003 > , > > That sounds like a good idea. I have gone to making raw goat milk kefir as > I understand that kefir is better for you than yogurt. Can't remember why > though. Also don't know what the carb, protein, fat ratio would be in > kefir. It seems to do me well though as I am hypoglycemic and I don't have > problems with it. Deborah Kefir has a more complex set of beneficial organisms than yogurt. I imagine the carb content would be similar to yogurt if it is aged long enough. Fat content depends on what kind of milk you use, of course. Kris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2003 Report Share Posted January 13, 2003 Wanita- >On fat, the way I look at it is what will 10% or 30% in good >fat consumption do in comparison to SAD diets that could be all bad fats. Well, that's true, for sure, but the same thing happens with a lot of other questionable diets. The blood type diet, for example, is basically ridiculous, but it still achieves great improvements for a lot of people because even though it's far from ideal, it's still lots better than what most people are eating because it eliminates all sorts of actively poisonous refined garbage. The metabolic typing people probably are a lot closer to reality than D'Adamo, but I think they're just flat-out wrong on the amount of fat people should be eating. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 14, 2003 Report Share Posted January 14, 2003 Whats been taking me from 10 AM to 3 PM no problem on workdays is 1/2 an avocado or whole if small and about 4 slices of raw cheese. Pricey but its not much food to get rocked around to upset my stomach doing physical work right after. Wanita At 05:26 PM 1/13/03 -0500, you wrote: >> In trying to eat a small snack rather than a meal before church I've been >> experimenting with yogurt, because I've found yogurt to keep my blood >sugar >> stable for a bit longer than milk, presumably from the lower carb content >and >> the fact that it's more solid (probably goes through more slowly than a >> liquid). I'd found that eating a chunk of butter with plain yogurt made >it >> stable even longer, but even this usually only stabalized my blood sugar >for >> 2 hours, 2.5 max. Including cod liver oil helps too. After finding I >needed >> more protein from MTD I added an egg instead of a chunk of butter, and it >> worked great-- blood sugar kept fine for four hours. >> >> BUT, an egg and whole milk yogurt, gram for gram, have the same amount of >fat >> as protein. This means they have TWICE the amount of fat as protein in >> caloric value. So MTD helped me a lot in my protein to carb ratio, but as >> far as fat is concnerned his recommendations can be chucked out the >window. >> I strikes me as perfectly natural to have majority of calories from fat, >> considering I didn't have to add ANY extra source of fat to my snack to >> achive such a ratio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 14, 2003 Report Share Posted January 14, 2003 >>>>In short, I wonder how much biochemical individuality is the normal state of humanity and how much it is a disease state of modern civilization. I'm NOT saying I don't believe in biochemcial individuality, like I said at the beginning, I find it convincing and very useful. But I wonder if most of the, say, glandular imbalance (adrenal-dominant, thyroid-dominant) and variance in organ shape/structure is just another manifestation of the same problem that causes variance in palate shape and structure, nostril shape and structure, etc. ------------->i wanted to mention that i have been wondering the same thing as well. BUT, having read sections of " Biochemical Individuality " by , if i'm recalling some of williams' work correctly, then i tend to think that a certain level of biochemical individuality is quite natural even when people from the same isolated regional group, and perhaps even the same family, experience the same life factors - diet, environment, genes. i'm sure that's a statement of the obvious, though. i don't recall the details, but i believe that williams tested many species, and family members within species (including twins, i think) and found some stark biochemical differences between them. perhaps all species and individuals tested were on nutrient-deficient, processed diets and were in some level of disease state...i don't know, but i do wonder how much disease and the diversity of dietary and environmental factors that we all experience in industrialized nations influence the depth of our bio-individuality... Suze Fisher Lapdog Design, Inc. Web Design & Development http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/ mailto:s.fisher22@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 14, 2003 Report Share Posted January 14, 2003 > In a message dated 1/13/03 5:35:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, > kris.johnson@... writes: > > > I just got Metabolic Typing, and have only read halfway thru it, but it > > strikes me that often when people talk about 'protein', what they really > > mean is 'protein foods' (meat, fish, eggs, etc.), which can easily have 50% > > fat calories or more. Maybe that is why his fat recommendations don't make > > sense. > > That's possible, I didn't even think of it. However, that's VERY confusing, > since that's such an unprecise and unusual way to calculate macronutrients. > I wonder though... what then is my whole milk yogurt? It has an equal > proportion of protein and fat gram for gram... is it a protein or a fat? > It's listed under his protein list, but has more fat than anything else in > caloric value. > > Chris The basic protein unit we speak of is 7 gm of protein, which is usually 1 ounce of meat, and about a cup of milk. Along with that you will get varying amounts of fat. I just looked at the analysis of some yogurt and milk from the Nutrition Analysis Tool at http://www.nat.uiuc.edu/mainnat.html, which is a bummer because they have oodles of yogurt but no whole milk yogurt! So I used whole milk for comparison. So look what happens to the percentages (8 oz of each, and I've rounded figures to the nearest whole number): 1. whole milk 145 cal, 52% fat (8g), 23% pro (9g), 30% carb (11g) 2. Breyers lowfat strawb. yogurt 230 cal, 10%fat (3g), 16% pro (9g),74% carb (43g) 3. Breyers nonfat blueb'n'cream yogurt 120 cal, 0% fat (0g), 27% pro (8g), 74% carb (23g) 4. Plain lowfat yogurt 143 cal, 23% fat (4g), 34% pro (12g), 45% carb (16g) #4 is high in protein because they have added extra dry milk solids, otherwise each of them would count as a serving of protein, but the fat and carb vary all over the place (all that added sugar) Whole milk is mostly fat calories but considered a protein food because it has the protein of an ounce of meat (approx.). Kris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 14, 2003 Report Share Posted January 14, 2003 Marla- >Couldn't the same be said for people who are guten intolerant? No, not exactly. Gluten was almost nonexistent in the foods we evolved in. It might have made up 5% of the proto-grains that were available before agriculture, but modern wheat has been bred for the highest possible gluten content, and more than 55% of it can be gluten. Though I think the current obsession with gluten neglects to consider the harmful effect of the starches in grains, especially in grains that haven't been properly prepared, there's no doubt that gluten is very difficult to digest, and isn't a protein we've had much chance to adapt to at all. That said, sure, a robustly healthy person is probably going to have a much easier time handling a 55%-gluten hard wheat than a sickly person... at least initially. But I think it's safe to say that that wheat will eventually wear down even the healthiest person's system. And looking around me, I don't see too many robustly healthy people. In fact, I hardly know any. We've become conditioned to accept all sorts of disease conditions as " normal " . By any rational standard, what we consider " healthy " is really out of shape, sickly and weak. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2003 Report Share Posted January 17, 2003 In a message dated 1/17/03 8:56:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, s.fisher22@... writes: > ----------> like paul, i'm not really interested in debating wheat in > the context of creationism vs. evolution. BTW, I don't really think wheat can be discussed outside the context of evolution. So I'm not going to put up a fight there :-P 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2003 Report Share Posted January 17, 2003 Hi Panamabob: Hmmm. I'd be interested to know where this is documented. If that's true, than yes, I can see the misrepresentation. I looked into this a while ago after reading some things on the net and then checked out a couple of the references that they used from the library. And from what I recall, the information about length of life WAS taken out of context and the length of life was in fact in the 100s. (But not in the 140's or 160's which was being claimed. They were having trouble figuring out how old some of the people were because they didn't have birth certificates, but rather knew time by certain events like so and so got married during this war and they knew that war to be in such and such year. Or families had great great grandparents still living, so that was another way people tried to determine age. It was difficult to get a correct age, so possibly that's how the length of life may have gotten inflated--if it was really inflated.) This was a little while ago when I first started questioning my veganism, so I didn't document that info. I would have to hunt for it again. But I do distinctly recall thinking that some of the info I found on the net regarding the Hunza was not accurate or at least info taken out of context. (Regarding their length of life.) Now this brings to mind McCarrison's work. I believe people still use his work regarding current ideas in diet. If I get a chance, I'd like to see if any claims are made that his work is incorrect. (His experiments supposedly resulted in excellent health of his test animals with the diets of the Hunza, Pathans, and Shiks.) Marla > No we, arent saying 100 years, we are saying 60 ish. Nothing phenomenal > although even 60 is good considering the location. > > Same deal with the supposed longlived horse-riding Georgians of central > asia (the yogurt boom is acredited to them) After the fact it was discovered > that again 60 and 70's which is still good considering there spryness, but > NOT over 100's like was initially interpreted. The only group that has good > documentation are the okinawans. > > Not to say that some of their practices are not potentially good ideas, like > drinking the milky white glacier water high in disolved minerals (as do the > indigenous mountain folks of South America). > > Currently the water quality has changed with the Hunza as well as the style > of living, thanks to new roads and " modern techniques " . There are small > qualtities of water that was collected by initial investigators that has > been preserved for study. As mentioned, present conditions are not > duplicating the lifestyle of old, with the detriment in health. > > Yea, our western lifestyle is not condusive to a real healthy > state...stress, toxins, bad diagnoses, etc. have curtailed the potential > quality of life that one would expect that a rich and educated society would > generate. Some improvements in sanitation have been taken away by mass > produced foder, negative influences, etc. > > Oh well... time to try something new somewhere with the basics. > > :-) > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2003 Report Share Posted January 17, 2003 Hi Chris: Here's a link that has other links too. http://www.earthtether.com/research.html Marla > Great! I'm currently making my first pair of shoes at Old Sturbridge > Village, a living history museum I work at twice a month during school and > full-time in the summer. If they're wearable when I finish them, I get to > keep them! Do you have any suggestions for further reading on negative > charges? > > Chris > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 18, 2003 Report Share Posted January 18, 2003 ---I grew some " ancient " wheat last year and it certainly is a lot different phenotypically (that's an adverb but I have no idea if I used it as such) than the stuff typically grown in Kansas nowadays. Dennis In , " Suze Fisher " <s.fisher22@v...> wrote: > > ----------> like paul, i'm not really interested in debating wheat > in > > the context of creationism vs. evolution. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.