Re: beer, not bread (was a few carb questions (Deanna, Heidi, Wanita))

[Guest guest]

Heidi,

>Yeah, I see the same when I read old accounts. Lots

>of meats mentioned, and beer, not a lot about bread.

>Unless you were in prison and fed " bread and water " .

>Most breads were coarse whole grain breads though,

>and like I said earlier, not generally wheat. The Finns

>were into rye bread, I think (Can anyone say " Wasa " ?).

>In English literature you hear a lot about barley

>( " Oats and beans and barley grow ... " ). Gluten

>intolerant folk can't eat barley, but barley probably

>doesn't cause gluten intolerance to the degree

>wheat does (there is very little gluten in barley).

>

I had to reply again to this, as I was just reading the Stefansson

article to the boys. The guy sounds like a pitchman for Dr. price in

part 3, where he gets heavily into dental caries stemming from a switch

to grain use increasing in diet from native fare in Iceland. Here's

more support for Heidi's " beer not bread " being the basis of grain use

early on in northern climes found in this excerpt. I highly recommend

y'all read this article in its entirety.

http://www.biblelife.org/stefansson3.htm

- by Vilhjalmur Stefansson, Harper's Monthly Magazine, January 1936

---------------------------------

The skulls in the Hastings-Stefansson collection represent persons of

ordinary Icelandic blood. There were no aborigines in that island when

the Irish discovered it some time before 700 A. D. When the Norsemen got

there in 860 they found no people except the Irish. It is now variously

estimated that in origin the Icelanders are from 10 percent to 30

percent Irish, 40 percent to 50 percent Norwegian, the remainder,

perhaps 10 percent, from Scotland, England, Sweden, and Denmark.

None of the people whose blood went into the Icelandic stock are

racially immune to tooth decay, nor are the modern Icelanders. Then why

were the Icelanders of the Middle Ages immune?

An analysis of the various factors make it pretty clear that their food

protected the teeth of the medieval Icelanders. The chief elements were

fish, mutton, milk and milk products. There was a certain amount of beef

and there may have been a little horse flesh, particularly in the

earliest period of the graveyard. Cereals were little important and

might be used for beer rather than porridge. Bread was negligible and so

were all other elements from the vegetable kingdom, native or imported.

My mother, who as born on the north coast of Iceland, remembered from

the middle of the nineteenth century a period when bread still was as

rare as caviar is in New York to-day - she tasted bread only three or

four times a year and then only small pieces when she went with her

mother visiting. So far as bread existed at her own house, it was used

as a treat for visiting children. The diet was still substantially that

of the Middle Ages, though the use of porridge was increasing. She did

not remember hearing of toothache in her early youth but did remember

accounts of it as a painful rarity about the time when she left for

America in 1876. Soon after arrival in the United States (Wisconsin,

Minnesota, Dakota,) and in Canada (Nova Scotia, Manitoba) the Icelandic

colonists became thoroughly familiar with the ravages of caries. They

probably had teeth as bad as those of the average American long before 1900.

There is then at least one case of a north-European people whose

immunity from caries (to judge from the Hastings-Stefansson collection

and common report) approached 100 percent for a thousand years, down to

approximately the time of the American Civil War. The diet was mainly

from the animal kingdom. Now that it has become, both in America and

Iceland approximately the same as the average for the United States or

Europe, Icelandic teeth show a high percentage of decay.

--------------------------------

Deanna

[Guest guest]

Deanna:

I don't know how " on-topic " this is, but I have to say it.

I have a stepdaughter. She is 21 years old. She doesn't live with us.

She has a very poor diet, in my opinion, like most young people in

this country. The time she spent living in this house was of little

avail in terms of turning her into a healthier diet and lifestyle.

She would eat one or two healthy meals at home, but then junk food

when she went out. Now, living on her own, she eats junk food at

least 50% of the time, I am afraid. She is a little overweight and

she often gets cold, but apart from that she has no major health

problem. And what is amazing: she has got one of the most perfect

natural dentures I have even seen. She is even a little careless

about tooth brushing etc, but she has no tooth decay, no filling, no

visible defect in her teeth. And more, she wasn't breastfed for a

very long time.

What is this? Is this a miracle? How can we explain this paradox?

José

> Heidi,

>

> >Yeah, I see the same when I read old accounts. Lots

> >of meats mentioned, and beer, not a lot about bread.

> >Unless you were in prison and fed " bread and water " .

> >Most breads were coarse whole grain breads though,

> >and like I said earlier, not generally wheat. The Finns

> >were into rye bread, I think (Can anyone say " Wasa " ?).

> >In English literature you hear a lot about barley

> >( " Oats and beans and barley grow ... " ). Gluten

> >intolerant folk can't eat barley, but barley probably

> >doesn't cause gluten intolerance to the degree

> >wheat does (there is very little gluten in barley).

> >

> I had to reply again to this, as I was just reading the Stefansson

> article to the boys. The guy sounds like a pitchman for Dr. price

in

> part 3, where he gets heavily into dental caries stemming from a

switch

> to grain use increasing in diet from native fare in Iceland.

Here's

> more support for Heidi's " beer not bread " being the basis of grain

use

> early on in northern climes found in this excerpt. I highly

recommend

> y'all read this article in its entirety.

>

> http://www.biblelife.org/stefansson3.htm

> - by Vilhjalmur Stefansson, Harper's Monthly Magazine, January 1936

> ---------------------------------

> The skulls in the Hastings-Stefansson collection represent persons

of

> ordinary Icelandic blood. There were no aborigines in that island

when

> the Irish discovered it some time before 700 A. D. When the

Norsemen got

> there in 860 they found no people except the Irish. It is now

variously

> estimated that in origin the Icelanders are from 10 percent to 30

> percent Irish, 40 percent to 50 percent Norwegian, the remainder,

> perhaps 10 percent, from Scotland, England, Sweden, and Denmark.

>

> None of the people whose blood went into the Icelandic stock are

> racially immune to tooth decay, nor are the modern Icelanders. Then

why

> were the Icelanders of the Middle Ages immune?

>

> An analysis of the various factors make it pretty clear that their

food

> protected the teeth of the medieval Icelanders. The chief elements

were

> fish, mutton, milk and milk products. There was a certain amount of

beef

> and there may have been a little horse flesh, particularly in the

> earliest period of the graveyard. Cereals were little important and

> might be used for beer rather than porridge. Bread was negligible

and so

> were all other elements from the vegetable kingdom, native or

imported.

>

> My mother, who as born on the north coast of Iceland, remembered

from

> the middle of the nineteenth century a period when bread still was

as

> rare as caviar is in New York to-day - she tasted bread only three

or

> four times a year and then only small pieces when she went with her

> mother visiting. So far as bread existed at her own house, it was

used

> as a treat for visiting children. The diet was still substantially

that

> of the Middle Ages, though the use of porridge was increasing. She

did

> not remember hearing of toothache in her early youth but did

remember

> accounts of it as a painful rarity about the time when she left for

> America in 1876. Soon after arrival in the United States

(Wisconsin,

> Minnesota, Dakota,) and in Canada (Nova Scotia, Manitoba) the

Icelandic

> colonists became thoroughly familiar with the ravages of caries.

They

> probably had teeth as bad as those of the average American long

before 1900.

>

> There is then at least one case of a north-European people whose

> immunity from caries (to judge from the Hastings-Stefansson

collection

> and common report) approached 100 percent for a thousand years,

down to

> approximately the time of the American Civil War. The diet was

mainly

> from the animal kingdom. Now that it has become, both in America

and

> Iceland approximately the same as the average for the United States

or

> Europe, Icelandic teeth show a high percentage of decay.

> --------------------------------

>

>

> Deanna

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

--

> Now, living on her own, she eats junk food at

> least 50% of the time, I am afraid. She is a little overweight and

> she often gets cold, but apart from that she has no major health

> problem. And what is amazing: she has got one of the most perfect

> natural dentures I have even seen. She is even a little careless

> about tooth brushing etc, but she has no tooth decay, no filling, no

> visible defect in her teeth. And more, she wasn't breastfed for a

> very long time.

>

> What is this? Is this a miracle? How can we explain this paradox?

My guess is that her parents had great teeth, and her mum had ample stores of

vitamins A

and calcium.

Brushing and flossing are more important from a social and aesthetic perspective

rather

than true dental health.

True dental healh " comes from within " - doesn't come out of a toothpaste.

The only exception is that she wasn't breastfed for a long time.

Her parents must have had great bone health, among other things.

-Pratick

__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

> --

>

> > Now, living on her own, she eats junk food at

> > least 50% of the time, I am afraid. She is a little overweight

and

> > she often gets cold, but apart from that she has no major health

> > problem. And what is amazing: she has got one of the most perfect

> > natural dentures I have even seen. She is even a little careless

> > about tooth brushing etc, but she has no tooth decay, no filling,

no

> > visible defect in her teeth. And more, she wasn't breastfed for a

> > very long time.

> >

> > What is this? Is this a miracle? How can we explain this paradox?

>

> My guess is that her parents had great teeth, and her mum had ample

stores of vitamins A

> and calcium.

> Brushing and flossing are more important from a social and

aesthetic perspective rather

> than true dental health.

> True dental healh " comes from within " - doesn't come out of a

toothpaste.

>

> The only exception is that she wasn't breastfed for a long time.

>

> Her parents must have had great bone health, among other things.

>

> -Pratick

Pratick:

Thank you for your input. I can't tell much about her father, whom I

don't know personally, but I can tell a lot about her mother, who is

my wife. My wife has not that great bone health you are talking

about. She has lost one or two teeth and has a few fillings. She has

also suffered from mild arthritis in one knee, but is much better now

that she is eating less dairy (on my advice). As for her father, I

asked my wife about him, but she couldn't remember much. Anyway, she

doesn't think his teeth were so impressive, beautiful and white as

the ones of their only daughter.

So it seems the mystery goes on ...

> __________________________________________________

>

[Guest guest]

>What is this? Is this a miracle? How can we explain this paradox?

>

>José

Good genes?

A lot of the dental enamel is laid down in youth too. So if

her mother ate good, and you fed her good, she can

be immune for a long time. Also in this country it's fairly

typical for kids to be ok for many years, then collapse

when they are in their 40s (when a lot of us started

looking into health issues!).

Heidi Jean

[Guest guest]

Ok, I was going to ask a related question, so this looks like the right time...

JC (I like that), you said that she eats junk food at least 50% of the time.

Does that mean that she does eat some healthy food? What food would that be?

Any raw milk, any sourdough bread, bone broth, or good quality meat?

Price did a study with some children who had a very deficient diet. He bought

them to a mission and reinforced one meal. The other meals at home were not

changed, nor the home care of the teeth.

" The nutrition provided these children in this one meal included the following

foods. About four ounces of tomato juice or orange juice and a teaspoonful of a

mixture of equal parts of a very high vitamin natural cod liver oil and an

especially high vitamin butter was given at the beginning of the meal. They then

received a bowl containing approximately a pint of a very rich vegetable and

meat stew, made largely from bone marrow and fine cuts of tender meat: the meat

was usually broiled separately to retain its juice and then chopped very fine

and added to the bone marrow meat soup which always contained finely chopped

vegetables and plenty of very yellow carrots; for the next course they had

cooked fruit, with very little sweetening, and rolls made from freshly ground

whole wheat, which were spread with the high-vitamin butter. The wheat for the

rolls was ground fresh every day in a motor driven coffee mill. Each child was

also given two glasses of fresh whole milk. The menu was varied from day to day

by substituting for the meat stew, fish chowder or organs of animals. "

This program completely controlled the dental caries of each member of the

group. Is it possible that she is getting enough body building minerals in the

good foods that she is eating?

[Guest guest]

--- In , " " <harringtonwa@b...>

wrote:

> Ok, I was going to ask a related question, so this looks like the

right time...

>

> JC (I like that), you said that she eats junk food at least 50% of

the time. Does that mean that she does eat some healthy food? What

food would that be? Any raw milk, any sourdough bread, bone broth,

or good quality meat?

>

:

Do you mean the acronym?

Well, I don't know what her current diet looks like exactly, but I

would guess it is something like this:

breakfast - white bread + margarine (or maybe cream cheese) + black

coffee

lunch - it is maybe the " best " meal, because she goes to a cafeteria

or restaurant, and possibly gets (white) rice + one kind of meat + a

little veggies. Let's add a coke, shall we?

mid-afternoon - maybe a cup of coffee + a cookie (optional) (when she

is here, she may eat a banana, her favourite fruit)

evening meal (usually at home, she isn't very fond of cooking) -

(white) bread or maybe noodles + some cold meat or commercial

hamburguer (you know, ready-to-eat meat). If she eats out, it could

be a pizza.

Are you aghast? Really, I don't think it could much better than that.

Some good things about her, though: she walks a lot and she usually

eats little (not a heavy eater, you know). Very outgoing personality.

JC