Re: Avoid Foods

[Guest guest]

I've been overwhelmed with a number of things, so I don't know if this has

been posted yet.

it's not the easiest to navigate, but it has good information

http://www.dadamo.com/typebase4/typeindexer.htm

Ellen

Re: Avoid Foods

> Maddviking@... wrote:

> > [Contains a component that can modify

> > known disease susceptibility " .]

>

> > Well, the first one, I think, is technospeak for " it'll lower your

immune

> > system " (germs in the digestive tract like mold etc).

>

> That doesn't cut it for me though - and this is a perfect example of the

> problem as I see it:

> The immune system is a complex system of cytokines from the thymus and

> bone marrow involving T-helper lymphocytes to balance the cytokine

> components from each side - it has nothing whatsoever to do with the gut!

>

> So if the food messes with mold in the gut - I want to know that as I

> also know how to overcome that with rice bran and acidophilus with PABA.

> But if it skews my immune system cytokines to either TH-1 or Th-2

> lymphocytes that is a very different matter, as my health involves TH-2

> excess.

>

> Also - if type O usually has low cortisol and I am high cortisol, I can

> only choose what to avoid that causes cortisol secretion if I know the

> specific. If D'ADamo is making the choice he is quite likely to damage

> my health by listing a cortisol raiser as beneficial for Os - because on

> average (that useless statistic!!!) the O's are low cortisol.

>

> It is the same issue for every person and every health issue - the

> specifics are *needed* - to use the research. Not just optional.

>

> So I DO need to know the scientific finding and not just D'Adamo's

> conclusion from it. And that will apply to most people whether they know

> it or not.

> With the specifics there would be no more pooh-poohing of BTD because

> the science would be out there for all to see. So what is D'Adamo afraid

> of in hiding it? It would be an advantage to list it surely?

>

> I sure hope he does it - soon :-))

> Until then the diet has some value - but a *lot* less value than it

> could have.

>

> NAmaste,

> IRene

> --

> Irene de Villiers, B.Sc; AASCA; MCSSA; D.I.Hom.

> P.O.Box 4703, Spokane, WA 99220-0703.

> http://www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html

> Veterinary Homeopath and Feline Information Counsellor.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

> I've been overwhelmed with a number of things, so I don't know

if this has

> been posted yet.

>

> it's not the easiest to navigate, but it has good information

>

> http://www.dadamo.com/typebase4/typeindexer.htm

>

> Ellen

Including lectin information.

[Guest guest]

I don't think it would be as easy as you say to include all the

detail. The encyclopedia is already extremely long. If you plan to

evaluate each food yourself, you probably don't want BTD. I've taken

the approach of doing further research on individual foods that I

would particularly like to keep in my diet. Sometimes I decide to go

ahead and have an avoid if I don't have the particular problem

associated with it. For example, he gives the value of 4.0 or lower

as a good indication that polyamines are under control. Since I know

I'm OK there, I don't worry so much about having frozen fish from

time to time. But I also make sure to include plenty of green tea,

walnuts and other foods that inhibit production of polyamines.

I'm just curious why you even tried BTD in the first place if the

Perricone Prescription had solved all your problems.

Cheryl

I think he looks at the balance of pluses and

> > minuses for each food.

>

> That doesn't make sense to me.

> Putting the scientific finding in place makes sense.

> D'Adamo can not make decisions about what is good for my system -

or

> anyone else's system - but he can explain what each food does or

does

> not do with the blood type and let the reader decide if they like

it or

> not, or can live with it or not.

>

> For example, if the only reason not to eat something was a known

> association with breast cancer - that would not bother me - I had

the

> disease and fixed it with homeopathy and could do so again - so

that is

> not a risk for me - it's a choice *I* want to make, is the point. I

> don't want it made for me. This is just an example - but it

illustrates

> the point that we *need* to know the scientific reason he dislikes

food

> - and if he wants to rate it good bad or indifferent for the

average

> person, fine, put a 1, 2, or 3 next to it or something - but he

needs to

> let the consumer decide whether it is an avoid in *our* specific

> circumstances by telling us the scientific finding associated with

the food.

> Hiding the scientific finding is wrong and prevents that proper

> usefulness of his research.

> WHY does he do that when it is not hard to provide what's needed?

>

> People who come to the diet are interested enough, and have

*individual*

> health issues enough to want to know how to apply this to

themselves

> *within* the O range - not as a general thing for just any old O

which

> is not them :-)))

>

> > Knowing him he probably has a computer

> > program set up with different weights assigned to different

factors.

>

> With respect that does not help the people who want to know

specifics.

> It only does a smeary average which by definition loses all value

for

> individual application.

> It has value for the " average " O person if there is such a thing.

> Putting out the real reasons has value to ALL O people. Is that not

better?

>

> We're a savvy lot by the time we get to believing in blood groups

> affecting diet. - We don't buy just any vitamin mix - we know what

we

> want for each ingredient - our food needs to be that way too.

>

> Namaste,

> Irene

> --

> Irene de Villiers, B.Sc; AASCA; MCSSA; D.I.Hom.

> P.O.Box 4703, Spokane, WA 99220-0703.

> http://www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html

> Veterinary Homeopath and Feline Information Counsellor.