Re: What about Protein & Calcium on Raw food plan?

July 27, 2006

Well, I didn't know where to even start so I'll just say you're really being

lied to with the protein info. There is no basis for anything in that answer

in your email.

July 27, 2006

Janice wrote:

> Hi Everybody, Here's a question from a book called " Living on Live

> Food " . This is quoted from the book on page 157 & 158.

Who wrote this book and what training did they have in clinical

nutrition, cell physiology or just plain zoology?

> WHAT ABOUT PROTEIN (AND CALCIUM)?

>

> Answer: This is by far the question I'm asked most frequently.

>

> Protein does not create protein in your body.

Sure does. ALL protein consists of joined amino acids that the body can

split and reassemble.

> Amino acids create

> protein in your body.

Yes.

And the best source of amino acids are leafy

> green vegetables.

According to what research?

> When you eat meat, fish, or chicken, you're not getting as much

> protein as you think you are.

You're getting a lot more than you'd get from leaves:-)

Plants including leaves, have the wrong ratious of amino acids to build

bodies for humans. This is why a diet based on soy protein, skews the

immune system and results in chronic diseases like diabetes,

fibromylagis, syndrome X and cancer to name a minority of them.

Take chicken, for example. Say there

> are 20 grams of protein in a chicken breast. Once you cook it, you

> destroy half the protein.

Again - according to whose " research " ?

It's completely untrue. ALL the protein is maintained!

The raw and cooked protein is available properly analysed - for any food

on the USDA database:-)

So if you take for example 100g of raw sirloin, item 13954 " Beef, bottom

sirloin, tri-tip roast, separable lean and fat, trimmed to 0 " fat, all

grades, raw " here:

http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/cgi-bin/list_nut_edit.pl

100g has 20.64g of protein.

If you cook it, there will be a water loss of about 20% so it will weigh

80g. So now check:

Item 23649 " Beef, bottom sirloin, tri-tip, separable lean only, trimmed

to 0 " fat, select, cooked, roasted " here

http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/cgi-bin/list_nut_edit.pl

80g has 21.74 g of protein.

ZERO protein is lost in cooking, the only thing lost is water so that a

steak weighs more when raw by approximately 20% (depending how long you

cook it and lose the juices/water).

YOu can do the same with chicken or any other protein, as protien is NOT

destroyed by heat:-)

> Now your body has to digest and

> assimilate this heavy, dense source of 10 grams of protein, that

> will take up to 100 hours.

In what sci-fi movie?

The body prefers the protein to be a dense source like meat as that is

what it is designed to digest. It uses ACID to digest it, and has a

lining designed to handle the acid.

Ten grams of protein is not a lot. A minimum decent steak is 80g (not

even 3 ounces), 8 times that. So you are talking a small bite or so of a

steak. It will be gone in an hour or less.

How much do you think is getting stuck

> in your body as toxic waste by the times it reaches your colon?

From meat? None.

From leaves, it does not get stuck in your colon - it gets stuck in

your kidneys - that is the readibng your doctor gets from the lab that

reads " BUN " . The N part is the nitrogen from undigested protein bits,

usually plant protein as it comes in the wrong amino acid ratios to make

muscles.

It comes in the ratio to make plants:-)

I do not know where these wild ideas originate but please look at some

real science and some common sense.

> How

> much protein from a cooked chicken breast will you actually get?

All of it.

> Maybe a few grams, if you're lucky.

Check the analysis database at USDA or any of the many others available.

> When I speak to bodybuilders and athletes about this, they often

> insist that animal protein is the best protein available.

They are correct.

Anyone who studies which amino acids are used for muscle can point out

that the ones in muscle are used to make muscle, and the ones in plants

are ideal ratios to make plants.

> If it's

> such a good source, why do they need so much of it?

It's good food. They are trying to force their bodies to have unnatural

muscle. Thei rbodies will not like it that much, and will use some of it

for the energy burned in execising. But if they ate plants instead

they'd soon be minus any biceps.

Some of my

> bodybuilding friends feel it necessary to eat large portons of meat

> with each of their six daily meals!

I eat meat every meal too, but no body building - just health building.

Protein is used for MANY functions in the body, not just making muscle.

> Many green vegetables are excellent sources of high quality

> protein.

No. They have microscopic amounts.

Again I refer you to the actual analysis numbers in the database:

http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/search/

Here you can look up any leaves you like.

You will see 100g of sprouts has 3 g or proten - not 21 grams - only a

seventh of beef. Spinach has even less.

> A bowl of uncooked greens or sprouts may only contain a

> few grams of protein, but you can digest and assimilate all of it

> beause they still have all of their vitamins, minerals, and enzymes

> intact. This make this protein far more useful to your body.

According to what Sci fi movies?

WE know better.

Meat is digested by hydrochloric acid in the stomach, not vitamins or

minerals or enzymes at all.

This is why cats eat meat and no plants and are healthy wiht their very

simplistic digestive systems designed for meat and no plants needed.

In fact cats do not have the ability to digest plants. It is PLANT

digestion that is so very difficult - not meat digestion - meat is easy!

Plants are the ones that need enzymes, and catalysts and other

complicated systems for digestion. That is why species that eat plants

have VERY long intestines (and cats very short ones, they have no work

to do!) - it takes all kinds of effort to digest plants, and they need

lots of chemiclas to break their little cells open to get at the insides

and even more to digest the complicated insides.

Cows go a step further and have several stomachs and use bacteria to

help them digest their plant food that is so hard to digest.

So wherever you are getting your suggestions - it is completely backwards!

You can't make a vegetarian diet that has all the recommended dietary

protein, carbs, fatty acids, minerals and vitamins in it.

Doesn't exist. You will get cold sores and worse.

Namaste,

Irene

--

Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.

P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.

www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)

" Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it. "

July 27, 2006

Maddviking@... wrote:

> Well, I didn't know where to even start so I'll just say you're really being

> lied to with the protein info. There is no basis for anything in that answer

> in your email.

YOu said it so much more simply Max!!!!

.....IRene

--

Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.

P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.

www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)

" Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it. "

July 28, 2006

http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/search/

Not being funny but I wouldn't trust anything put out by any

Government.

What makes this so right, other than it goes along with what you

think ?

Whatever anyone thinks is right, there is examples everywhere that

refute it.

I do appreciate that there are those on this group who are finding the

type 'O' diet suits them and is helping them improve their health, but

to act like every vegetarian type 'o' is unhealthy and ill is a bit

extremist and paranoid as there are thousands of very healthy and

happy type 'O' vegetarians out there and there are even also many who

live v. long and healthy lives too.