Re: Quillan's book and eating meat

[Guest guest]

Elliot wrote: " Nowhere in the edition of " Beating Cancer With Nutrition " I have

does

Quillin recommend eating beef or pork. "

For openers, a books such as Quillin wrote, is an 'information filled'

book for more than people on this list or for Vegans. It is a book to the

general population as well. People on this list also eat meat and while it is

clear that Quillin warns that the diet of our ancestors, which included meat, is

not the 'Cow' we eat today, but rather lean meat. He claims what meat they did

eat was only 1/3 of the diet back then.

That being said, he gives menus as a guide and in the issue I have, gives a menu

which includes Pot Roast, that's beef. Flank Steak......that's beef and Ground

Beef...........that's surely beef! The man knows that people will eat meat and

he goes from that small point in his book to many more important matters and

more thoroughly.

The posts regarding this subject have gone far a field from the statement that

started it. One simply stated something to the effect, " Quillin

recommends meat " . My effort in response was to make sure people were not

turned away from the book and simply show that Quillin was simply writing to

everyone which includes meat-eaters. One quickly realizes, when reading his

updated book, that eating meat is hardly its thrust. Not everything, in any

protocol, works for all people.......all the time!

One studies and gleans the best they can from what they find and 'Beating Cancer

With Nutrition' is one heck of a good source for people interested in nutrition

in general. It is a compact book of 415 pages chock-full of information, about

minerals, vitamins etc., that I personally find educational. I then temper it,

rightly or wrongly, with my own beliefs.

This is it for me and the book.

Joe C.+

[Guest guest]

Opinions on the so called " right " anti-cancer diet are varied, and at times also

very different from one another.

While it is true that many of the famous practitioners who have relied heavily

on diets to asist the body with cancer have recommend their patients mainly

vegetarian diets with no or minimal animal fats, there some others that

advocate completely differnt anti-cancer diets. One such person who comes to

mind is Aajanus Vonderplanitz. He cured his cancer on a diet consisting mainly

of raw meat.

Another person who advocate an anti-cancer diet that is extremely rich with

animal fat is Barry Groves from

http://www.second-opinions.co.uk

At the bottom of my post I will paste here an e-mail correspondence I had with

Barry in June 2003, regarding diet.

Around two years ago I had a woman patient with small cell lung cancer (SCLC).

Three years before her cancer was diagnosed, she and her husband became total

vegetarians and adopted a macrobiotic diet.

SCLC is a disease which is highly (99%) associated with smoking. It is quite

rare to see a patient like her, who was a non smoker and who was not exposed to

second hand smoke or pollution contract this type of cancer.

Moreover my intake with this woman did not give me any indication that she was

exposed, in any extraordinarily way, to any strong or high magnitude

carcinogens.

Now, what type of an anti-cancer diet would one recommend in such a case? Should

she continue with macrobiotics or should she adopt a diet that is quite

different?

Obviously, she thought that she was eating the healthiest diet on earth, namely

macrobiotics. Unfortunately, for her macrobiotics did not serve as a good safety

net.

On the other hand, should we then generalize from her case, and conclude that

macrobiotics is a lousy diet, or for that matter a bad anti-cancer diet? In my

opinion that would be a grave mistake. There are plenty of cancer patients who

are willing to swear that microbiotics actually cured their cancer.

I guess the picture is a bit more complex than we would like it to be or are

ready to admit.

It was Lucretius who said: " what is food to one person may be bitter poison to

others " .

, I would love for you to contribute on this topic to the list. Would you

please?

Gubi

********************************************************************************\

************************************************************************

Barry Groves' e-mail to me dated 6/23/2003:

" Cancers thrive on blood glucose. Their supply must be cut off. Vegetarian diets

inevitably contain large amounts of carbs. The only reason some work is that

they are generally eaten raw, which means that few of their nutrients are

bioavailable, and the patient starves -- which is another way of cutting the

sugars out.

The best dietary regime would cut out all sugars and most starches, making up

the energy difference with animal fats. Ideal ratios are 70% fat, 20% protein

and 10% carb. This means inevitably that the diet has to be animal product based

-- and high in animal fat as well. I would cut out most fruit and include only

small amounts of green leafy veges. I have included an idea below as it has been

found effective. You will have to adapt it for either Jewish or Muslim

religions, replacing pork products with something else.

Buy fat meat. Buy from a regular butcher, not a supermarket, to get what you

want. Also fry breakfast and some dinners, have cream in hot drinks where others

would have milk, put butter occasionally on veges if the meat isn't fat and eat

unsweetened fruit with cream. Below is a typical day's menu. By the way, the

stearic acid in cocoa also has benefits as it inhibits thromboses. All cancers

need a thrombus to metastasise, thus anything that stops a thrombus forming

prevents metastases " .

Breakfast 8:00 am

72g egg

75g bacon

75g apple

70g single cream (in cocoa)

18g cocoa powder

1 pint water

C=13.5g: P=40.3g: F=68g -- 827.2 cals

Lunch 13:00

115g pork

31g onion

60g carrot

80g squash

50g lard (for frying the above)

56g Cheddar

1 pint water

C=14.9g: P=39g: F=70g -- 846 cals

Evening meal 18:00

140g brie

75g apple

50g cream (in cocoa)

C=13.9g : P=31g : F=45.9g -- 593 cals

Day's totals:

C = 42.3g; P = 110.3g; F = 183.9g

C = 169 kcal, P = 441 kcal, F = 1655 kcal = 2265 kcals

C = 7.5%; P = 19.5%; F = 73.0%

Sincerely

Barry

http://www.second-opinions.co.uk

,_._,___

[Guest guest]

Opinions on the so called " right " anti-cancer diet are varied, and at times also

very different from one another.

While it is true that many of the famous practitioners who have relied heavily

on diets to asist the body with cancer have recommend their patients mainly

vegetarian diets with no or minimal animal fats, there some others that

advocate completely differnt anti-cancer diets. One such person who comes to

mind is Aajanus Vonderplanitz. He cured his cancer on a diet consisting mainly

of raw meat.

Another person who advocate an anti-cancer diet that is extremely rich with

animal fat is Barry Groves from

http://www.second-opinions.co.uk

At the bottom of my post I will paste here an e-mail correspondence I had with

Barry in June 2003, regarding diet.

Around two years ago I had a woman patient with small cell lung cancer (SCLC).

Three years before her cancer was diagnosed, she and her husband became total

vegetarians and adopted a macrobiotic diet.

SCLC is a disease which is highly (99%) associated with smoking. It is quite

rare to see a patient like her, who was a non smoker and who was not exposed to

second hand smoke or pollution contract this type of cancer.

Moreover my intake with this woman did not give me any indication that she was

exposed, in any extraordinarily way, to any strong or high magnitude

carcinogens.

Now, what type of an anti-cancer diet would one recommend in such a case? Should

she continue with macrobiotics or should she adopt a diet that is quite

different?

Obviously, she thought that she was eating the healthiest diet on earth, namely

macrobiotics. Unfortunately, for her macrobiotics did not serve as a good safety

net.

On the other hand, should we then generalize from her case, and conclude that

macrobiotics is a lousy diet, or for that matter a bad anti-cancer diet? In my

opinion that would be a grave mistake. There are plenty of cancer patients who

are willing to swear that microbiotics actually cured their cancer.

I guess the picture is a bit more complex than we would like it to be or are

ready to admit.

It was Lucretius who said: " what is food to one person may be bitter poison to

others " .

, I would love for you to contribute on this topic to the list. Would you

please?

Gubi

********************************************************************************\

************************************************************************

Barry Groves' e-mail to me dated 6/23/2003:

" Cancers thrive on blood glucose. Their supply must be cut off. Vegetarian diets

inevitably contain large amounts of carbs. The only reason some work is that

they are generally eaten raw, which means that few of their nutrients are

bioavailable, and the patient starves -- which is another way of cutting the

sugars out.

The best dietary regime would cut out all sugars and most starches, making up

the energy difference with animal fats. Ideal ratios are 70% fat, 20% protein

and 10% carb. This means inevitably that the diet has to be animal product based

-- and high in animal fat as well. I would cut out most fruit and include only

small amounts of green leafy veges. I have included an idea below as it has been

found effective. You will have to adapt it for either Jewish or Muslim

religions, replacing pork products with something else.

Buy fat meat. Buy from a regular butcher, not a supermarket, to get what you

want. Also fry breakfast and some dinners, have cream in hot drinks where others

would have milk, put butter occasionally on veges if the meat isn't fat and eat

unsweetened fruit with cream. Below is a typical day's menu. By the way, the

stearic acid in cocoa also has benefits as it inhibits thromboses. All cancers

need a thrombus to metastasise, thus anything that stops a thrombus forming

prevents metastases " .

Breakfast 8:00 am

72g egg

75g bacon

75g apple

70g single cream (in cocoa)

18g cocoa powder

1 pint water

C=13.5g: P=40.3g: F=68g -- 827.2 cals

Lunch 13:00

115g pork

31g onion

60g carrot

80g squash

50g lard (for frying the above)

56g Cheddar

1 pint water

C=14.9g: P=39g: F=70g -- 846 cals

Evening meal 18:00

140g brie

75g apple

50g cream (in cocoa)

C=13.9g : P=31g : F=45.9g -- 593 cals

Day's totals:

C = 42.3g; P = 110.3g; F = 183.9g

C = 169 kcal, P = 441 kcal, F = 1655 kcal = 2265 kcals

C = 7.5%; P = 19.5%; F = 73.0%

Sincerely

Barry

http://www.second-opinions.co.uk

,_._,___

[Guest guest]

At 04:56 AM 6/30/2007, you wrote:

>[snip]

>

>, I would love for you to contribute on this topic to the

>list. Would you please?

>

>Gubi

Gubi,

First one needs to set aside all one's petty little food

indoctrinations, then look at the advisability of changing the

diet. There are two starting understandings that should be addressed

with ever cancer patient. First: the diet prior to the cancer

diagnosis was not a cancer-killing diet. Second: No diet, no matter

how " good " or " bad " has much influence on low-grade cancers.

You start with those two common-sense notions. For example, do

you tell a life-long vegan that he/she must become a

vegetarian? No. Do you tell the life-long vegan that they must

start eating meat? No. If it looks like the cancer is one that is

amenable to dietary intervention you must next decide if diet is

going to be the main strategy or determine how diet can effectively

dovetail with the main strategy.

If the diet is going to be the main strategy then you must

explain the dietary conundrums (as the example above) to the patient

along with his/her smartest dietary options. The patient must become

involved. In my discourses at the Center I usually give many

examples of other clients. Parables are a great way to teach. It is

best to never insult the patient with platitudinous stories. The

best teaching stories are those that are counter-intuitive. Those

are the cases that teach us all.

The whole process must be interactive just to make sure that

you and the patient are on the same page. It is very useful to know

if the client has no dietary discipline or can't get through the day

with meat, sugar, alcohol, etc.

The next great rule of cancer diets is that any truly worthy

diet is going to be a forgiving diet. There should be some latitude

to accommodate occasional quality-of-life venial dietary

infractions. Patients must know this. If they don't then their

nether-conscious mind could tell them, " Uh-oh, I ate a Snickers Bar

so I guess I'm going to die. " Any diet that is not a forgiving diet

is no diet at all.

The same holds true for tobacco and alcohol. I told you

about the guy whose terminal NSCLC with SVCS resolved in spite of his

inability to quit smoking 3-4 packs of Pall Mall filterless

cigarettes per day and drinking a quart of J & B scotch whisky

daily. A smart diet can work around some very obstructive behavior.

BTW, Perhaps the best answer to meat question is found in the

movie, " My Big Fat Greek Wedding. "

[Guest guest]

Hi, Gubi.

With due respect, from what I have read about Aajanus Vonderplanitz,

he is not a good example for anyone to follow. The man has become a

fanatic about food. It appears to be all he lives for---to experiment

with this, that or the other diet. Then, when I read for a fact,

because it was from his own autobiographical writing, that he went

into supermarkets, bought their beef and ate it raw, I

said, " Enough, " and crossed him off my list of people to whom to pay

attention.

Regarding the macrobiotic diet, there is much confusion these days

about what constitutes a macrobiotic diet. If you go to wikipedia,

you will see that a macrobiotic diet is not at all necessarily wholly

vegetarian---that fish and shrimp can be a part of it.

I knew a woman in New York City years ago who ate a macrobiotic diet,

and she was quite limited as to what she could and couldn't eat. She

ate mostly brown rice and ate lots of very salty pickles. From what I

understand, pickling things makes them difficult to digest and fairly

worthless with regard to nourishment. Also, much of what one eats on

a macrobiotic diet is cooked. Finally, for me, and, I think for many

other people, eating macrobiotically is too detailed, too regimented,

too complicated.

A whole foods, high bulk/low calorie diet is working very well for

me.

But I agree with you and others who believe there is no one diet that

should be applied across the board with no exceptions.

Stress is a factor that must be paid attention to when a person is

diagnosed with cancer. In fact for me, I believe stress has been the

foremost factor that has caused the cancer to grow or to remain

quiescent. I think perhaps to take someone who has been eating lots

of animal protein all their life and to tell them they must not eat

any more of it---to suddenly cut them off from it---could be too

stressful for them.

When I cut out animal protein, it took me weeks before I feltthe same

sense of fullness/satisfaction subsequent to eating a

vegetable/fruit/grain meal that I had when I was eating meat.

In the early 90's, shortly after being diagnosed with cancer, I

visited a naturopath. After interviewing me, he put me on

a " vegetarian diet with a little chicken. " I expect he did so because

he knew I'd been eating meat for decades.

Another reason why a naturopath might want to be careful of suddenly

putting a peron on a totally non-animal product diet is because it is

quite possible for that person not to eat enough variety, and so to

not get enough protein/enough nourishment, and so to suffer

physically and mentally. I once became seriously depressed, I believe

due to eating an unbalanced vegetarian diet.

Elliot

>Opinions on the so called " right " anti-cancer diet are varied, and

at times also very different from one another.

> While it is true that many of the famous practitioners who have

relied heavily on diets to asist the body with cancer have recommend

their patients mainly vegetarian diets with no or minimal animal

fats, there some others that advocate completely differnt anti-

cancer diets. One such person who comes to mind is Aajanus

Vonderplanitz. He cured his cancer on a diet consisting mainly of raw

meat. Another person who advocate an anti-cancer diet that is extremely rich

with animal fat is Barry Groves from

> http://www.second-opinions.co.uk........

> , I would love for you to contribute on this topic to the

list. Would you please?

[see Gubi's post for his full message]

[Guest guest]

At 04:56 AM 6/30/2007, you wrote:

>[snip]

>

>, I would love for you to contribute on this topic to the

>list. Would you please?

>

>Gubi

Gubi,

First one needs to set aside all one's petty little food

indoctrinations, then look at the advisability of changing the

diet. There are two starting understandings that should be addressed

with ever cancer patient. First: the diet prior to the cancer

diagnosis was not a cancer-killing diet. Second: No diet, no matter

how " good " or " bad " has much influence on low-grade cancers.

You start with those two common-sense notions. For example, do

you tell a life-long vegan that he/she must become a

vegetarian? No. Do you tell the life-long vegan that they must

start eating meat? No. If it looks like the cancer is one that is

amenable to dietary intervention you must next decide if diet is

going to be the main strategy or determine how diet can effectively

dovetail with the main strategy.

If the diet is going to be the main strategy then you must

explain the dietary conundrums (as the example above) to the patient

along with his/her smartest dietary options. The patient must become

involved. In my discourses at the Center I usually give many

examples of other clients. Parables are a great way to teach. It is

best to never insult the patient with platitudinous stories. The

best teaching stories are those that are counter-intuitive. Those

are the cases that teach us all.

The whole process must be interactive just to make sure that

you and the patient are on the same page. It is very useful to know

if the client has no dietary discipline or can't get through the day

with meat, sugar, alcohol, etc.

The next great rule of cancer diets is that any truly worthy

diet is going to be a forgiving diet. There should be some latitude

to accommodate occasional quality-of-life venial dietary

infractions. Patients must know this. If they don't then their

nether-conscious mind could tell them, " Uh-oh, I ate a Snickers Bar

so I guess I'm going to die. " Any diet that is not a forgiving diet

is no diet at all.

The same holds true for tobacco and alcohol. I told you

about the guy whose terminal NSCLC with SVCS resolved in spite of his

inability to quit smoking 3-4 packs of Pall Mall filterless

cigarettes per day and drinking a quart of J & B scotch whisky

daily. A smart diet can work around some very obstructive behavior.

BTW, Perhaps the best answer to meat question is found in the

movie, " My Big Fat Greek Wedding. "

[Guest guest]

Studies from " Low Value " High school's to Penal systems have shown that

correct food changed the " negative " to positive.

You are what you eat.

Blue

From: breathedeepnow

Something else appalling about " Vonderplanetz, " aside from the very bad,made-up

name. He makes it clear that he believes what one eats affects one's temper. He

says that when he was not eating meat, he easily got into a rage; but when he

eats meat he is able to keep his temper. Gandhi was a vegetarian, and the

Massai, who drink blood and whole raw cow's milk, are/were some of the fiercest

warriors in the world. Patience and keeping one's temper are vastly more due to

working on one's personality than they are due to what one eats.

Elliot

[Guest guest]

Elliot,

" Patience and keeping one's temper " are rarely due to either

diet or purposeful self-development. Rage and violence are functions

of testosterone, of genetics, of maturation, of cultural norms, of

encouragement, of indoctrination, of fear of retribution, and of the

passions of the moment. Sometimes religion has a constraining

influence; sometimes not. In this week's LA times were articles on

marine chaplains telling the soldiers it is morally, legally and

ethically correct to go to Iraq and kill, while their commanders are

teaching them to kill selectively to win the hearts and minds of the

civilians. Soldiers who were shipping out to Iraq often seem to have

romantic notions in how they plan their own funerals. I have met

with soldiers at the VA hospital who feel that they have been ordered

to die or get dismembered for oil and neo-con Christianity and this

doesn't sit well with most of them. The newspapers have photos of

the men heading off to Iraq. The commanders looked very brave and

their wives seemed proud. Most of the enlisted had a

how-did-I-get-into-this look on their faces. All to many who come

back can be found standing by the freeway off-ramp with crude signs

pleading for help. I can't hire them. They were naive when they

signed up and mentally/emotionally damaged when discharged.

If food were a major determinant of rage, then military

commanders would have exploited this long ago.

At 07:20 PM 6/30/2007, you wrote:

>Something else appalling about " Vonderplanetz, " aside from the very

>bad, made-up name---

>

>He makes it clear that he believes what one eats affects one's temper.

>He says that when he was not eating meat, he easily got into a rage;

>but when he eats meat he is able to keep his temper.

>

>Gandhi was a vegetarian, and the Massai, who drink blood and whole raw

>cow's milk, are/were some of the fiercest warriors in the world.

>

>Patience and keeping one's temper are vastly more due to working on

>one's personality than they are due to what one eats.

>

>Elliot

[Guest guest]

,

Thanks for pitching in.

I can certainly relate to diets having to be forgiving every now and then,

especially when they constitute a magnitudinal change from the patient's former

diet.

During the meeting, patients often ask me, what they should do on those

relatively rare occasions that they are invited to a wedding or any other

celebration banquets. " they don't serve organic vegetables in these places " ,

they would say.

This is usually an indication to me that they will be compliant. On the other

hand, I find myself calming them down, and explaining that these deviations from

the norm, are exactly the things that will keep them sane, and give them the

strength to keep up with their anti-cancer diets.

have not watched " My Big Fat Greek Wedding " yet. Recommended?

Regards,

Gubi

Re: [ ] Quillan's book and eating meat

At 04:56 AM 6/30/2007, you wrote:

>[snip]

>

>, I would love for you to contribute on this topic to the

>list. Would you please?

>

>Gubi

Gubi,

First one needs to set aside all one's petty little food

indoctrinations, then look at the advisability of changing the

diet. There are two starting understandings that should be addressed

with ever cancer patient. First: the diet prior to the cancer

diagnosis was not a cancer-killing diet. Second: No diet, no matter

how " good " or " bad " has much influence on low-grade cancers.

You start with those two common-sense notions. For example, do

you tell a life-long vegan that he/she must become a

vegetarian? No. Do you tell the life-long vegan that they must

start eating meat? No. If it looks like the cancer is one that is

amenable to dietary intervention you must next decide if diet is

going to be the main strategy or determine how diet can effectively

dovetail with the main strategy.

If the diet is going to be the main strategy then you must

explain the dietary conundrums (as the example above) to the patient

along with his/her smartest dietary options. The patient must become

involved. In my discourses at the Center I usually give many

examples of other clients. Parables are a great way to teach. It is

best to never insult the patient with platitudinous stories. The

best teaching stories are those that are counter-intuitive. Those

are the cases that teach us all.

The whole process must be interactive just to make sure that

you and the patient are on the same page. It is very useful to know

if the client has no dietary discipline or can't get through the day

with meat, sugar, alcohol, etc.

The next great rule of cancer diets is that any truly worthy

diet is going to be a forgiving diet. There should be some latitude

to accommodate occasional quality-of-life venial dietary

infractions. Patients must know this. If they don't then their

nether-conscious mind could tell them, " Uh-oh, I ate a Snickers Bar

so I guess I'm going to die. " Any diet that is not a forgiving diet

is no diet at all.

The same holds true for tobacco and alcohol. I told you

about the guy whose terminal NSCLC with SVCS resolved in spite of his

inability to quit smoking 3-4 packs of Pall Mall filterless

cigarettes per day and drinking a quart of J & B scotch whisky

daily. A smart diet can work around some very obstructive behavior.

BTW, Perhaps the best answer to meat question is found in the

movie, " My Big Fat Greek Wedding. "

[Guest guest]

,

I was not looking for your political/religious opinions about Iraq or

anything else. I was simply pointing out that " Vonderplanetz " is off-

the-wall. Let's keep this board about cancer. Otherwise, we can get off

on many tangents, and can end up in serious arguments.

Elliot

[Guest guest]

Blue Willow,

The debate about what is " correct food " (???) could go on ad infinitum.

Generally, " correct food " means elimination of junk, sugar, etc. It is

not about animal products versus vegetable products. I was simply

pointing out that Vonderplanetz is incorrect.

Elliot