One Food That Can Eat Away At Your Brain

Sugar and carbohydrates can harm brain structure and function

sugarThis article originally appeared on Live in the Now.

Scientists at Charité University Medical Centre in Berlin have found eating large amounts of sugar or carbohydrates is linked to a smaller hippocampus, the area of the brain involved in memory. This could explain why they also discovered that high levels of blood glucose are associated with impaired memory and could potentially lead to dementia. Thus, sugar can harm both brain structure and function.

Diabetes, a condition characterized by chronically elevated blood sugar, is linked to a higher risk of dementia and reduced hippocampus size. In view of these facts, the study sought to determine the effects of sugar on people who don’t have the illness. Researchers monitored the long- and short-term glucose levels of 141 non-diabetic adults as well as imaged their brain with an MRI scan and tested their memory. They found higher levels of glucose were linked to shrinkage of the hippocampus and impaired memory. The results suggest sugar can alter brain structure and harm memory even in people who don’t have diabetes.

Earlier Research Shows Sugar, High Fructose Corn Syrup and Refined Carbs Hinder Brain Function

The new research builds upon a study conducted two years ago at UCLA that showed the effects on the brain of high-fructose corn syrup, a common sweetener present in many foods. Researchers first allowed rats to spend a few days learning how to get through a maze. The next phase of the study involved feeding them a fructose solution for six weeks and then putting them back in the maze to see how well they could remember how to navigate it. The findings showed their memory of how to perform this activity was significantly impaired, and their brains showed a reduction in synaptic activity, which is the means the cells use to communicate with each other.

A great deal of solid scientific research shows cognitive decline can, indeed, take place as a result of consuming sugar and refined carbohydrates — even in small amounts, David Platt, Ph.D., CEO of Boston Therapeutics, tells Live in the Now. “In these studies, the consumption of sugar and carbs has been established as a definite risk factor in damaging both memory and thinking skills.”

“Just this year, for example, Mayo Clinic researchers found that people aged 70 and older who consume food high in carbs increase their likelihood of developing mild cognitive impairment fourfold, and the danger is also present with a diet heavy in sugar. Moreover, in 2009, a team at Wake Forest University established that cognitive functioning abilities decrease as average blood sugar levels increase in people with type 2 diabetes. Unfortunately, many people are not fully aware of these conclusions, but they are as important to know as the dangers of cigarette smoking.”

Subscribe to the free Live in the Now newsletter here!


http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sugar-may-harm-brain-health/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2683174/Is-SUGAR-responsible-rising-dementia-cases-High-levels-glucose-cause-memory-loss-study-finds.html

http://www.forbes.com/sites/alicegwalton/2012/05/16/fructose-may-make-you-stupid-but-omega-3s-can-smarten-you-back-up/

Tags: ,

Curcumin in Parkinson’s Disease

 
Curr Pharm Des. 2012;18(1):91-9.

Curcumin: a potential neuroprotective agent in Parkinson’s disease.

Author information

 Abstract

Parkinson’s disease (PD) is an age-associated neurodegenerative disease clinically characterized as a movement disorder. The motor symptoms in PD arise due to selective degeneration of dopaminergic neurons in the substantia nigra of the ventral midbrain thereby depleting the dopamine levels in the striatum. Most of the current pharmacotherapeutic approaches in PD are aimed at replenishing the striatal dopamine. Although these drugs provide symptomatic relief during early PD, many patients develop motor complications with long-term treatment. Further, PD medications do not effectively tackle tremor, postural instability and cognitive deficits. Most importantly, most of these drugs do not exhibit neuroprotective effects in patients. Consequently, novel therapies involving natural antioxidants and plant products/molecules with neuroprotective properties are being exploited for adjunctive therapy. Curcumin is a polyphenol and an active component of turmeric (Curcuma longa), a dietary spice used in Indian cuisine and medicine. Curcumin exhibits antioxidant, anti-inflammatory and anti-cancer properties, crosses the blood-brain barrier and is neuroprotective in neurological disorders. Several studies in different experimental models of PD strongly support the clinical application of curcumin in PD. The current review explores the therapeutic potential of curcumin in PD.

Please Pass the Turmeric

Turmeric, a member of the ginger family, is often found in curries and other spicy dishes from India, Asia, and the Middle East. The spice contains a compound called curcumin that has been used by Ayurveda practitioners for centuries to treat a variety of ailments.

SampliSuper Food: Let's Talk Tumericng of Studies

In 2012, a study published in AYU, An International Quarterly Journal of Research in Ayurveda, reported on three Alzheimer’s patients exhibiting irritability, anxiety, and agitation among other symptoms. Findings indicated that behavioral issues had improved significantly after being treated with less than a gram of turmeric daily for a period of three months. The study concluded turmeric, when combined with routine therapy, increased quality of life and improved performance of activities of daily living in patients studied.

Several years ago, ethnobotanist James A. Duke, Ph.D., published a comprehensive summary of over 700 turmeric studies that support the Ayurveda research. This herbal antidote was found to counteract symptoms of Alzheimer’s by blocking formation of beta-amyloid, the sticky protein substance believed to have a hand in cell and tissue loss indicative of an Alzheimer’s brain. In addition, turmeric reduced inflammation of neural tissue associated with the disease.

The Journal of Neuroscience had also previously published a study that supports the AYU findings, calling the alternative treatment promising. Tests conducted on mice suggested that the herb did indeed reduce plaques in the brain.

Please Pass the Turmeric

So the logical question is, how do we get turmeric into our diet? The most obvious way, of course, is to enjoy curry dishes as often as possible. Also consider adding a bit to your smoothie or whipping up some turmeric tea. We found the following recipe on Dr. Andrew Weil’s website. He suggests experimenting with ingredients until you find a pleasing balance of flavors:

Dr. Weil’s Turmeric Tea:

  1. Bring four cups of water to a boil.
  2. Add one teaspoon of ground turmeric and reduce to a simmer for 10 minutes.
  3. Strain the tea through a fine sieve into a cup. Add honey, ginger, and/or lemon to taste.

Ground turmeric is commonly used, but Weil suggests experimenting with freshly grated turmeric for a little added zing. Supplements are also available in tablet and soft gel form and can typically be found wherever vitamins are purchased.

The Debate on Alternative Treatments

Efficacy of natural treatments is a hot topic, and no matter which side you’re on, this discussion often results in intense debate. As with coconut oil, for everything you read that touts its effectiveness, you’ll likely find something that disputes that claim.

One statistic that bodes well for this herbal treatment is that India has one of the world’s lowest rates of Alzheimer’s. Could that be directly correlated to the country’s high consumption of turmeric? No one knows, but there are ongoing trials studying this very subject, and it’s likely we’ll be hearing more. Until then, always discuss any potential treatments with your physician. Even natural, alternative treatments can cause negative interactions with prescribed medications.

Protein Content of Green Vegetables Compared to Meat?

Fuhrman

Some have inquired about further data and sources, in the listing of the protein content of green vegetables compared to red meat in Eat To Live, so more complete data is posted here.

In the chart below, an equal caloric amount (100 calories) of porterhouse steak is compared to broccoli, romaine lettuce and kale. Broccoli provides the greatest amount of protein per calorie.

Green vegetables are all rich in protein, and relatively low in calories. They provide generous amounts of most micronutrients with no cholesterol and virtually no fat. Meat on the other hand, is relatively low in micronutrients. Remember whole grains, beans and seeds are also high in protein and should be utilized to achieve adequate protein on a diet with no or minimal animal products. But the point in this example was to illustrate how weight-loss favorable green vegetables are and that no matter how many green vegetables you eat, you still cannot take in too many calories. If you fill up on greens, they will reduce your desire and ability to overeat.

Broccoli, frozen,
chopped boiled
Romaine
Lettuce
Kale,
cooked
Beef Short Loin,
Porterhouse Steak,
separable lean & fat,
1/8 “ fat, broiled
Beef short Loin,
Porterhouse Steak,
separable lean & fat,
1/4” fat, broiled
Calories 100 100 100 100 100
Weight (g) 357 (12.6oz) 588 (20.7oz) 358 (12.6oz) 34 (1.2oz) 30 (1.0oz)
Protein (g) 11.1 7.2 6.8 8.0 6.5
Fat (g) 0.4 1.8 1.4 7.4 7.7
Carbohydrate (g) 19.2 19.4 20.2 0 0
Fiber 10.8 12.4 7.2 0 0
Cholesterol 0 0 0 24.1 21.6
Calcium (mg) 118 194 258 2.7 2.4
Iron (mg) 2.2 5.7 3.2 0.9 0.8
Magnesium (mg) 46 82 64.4 7.8 6.0
Potassium (mg) 507 1453 816.2 109 76.5
Vitamin C (mg) 143 23.5 146.8 0 0
Thiamin (mg) 0.2 0.4 0.2 0 0
Riboflavin (mg) 0.3 0.4 0.3 0 0
Niacin (mg) 1.6 1.8 1.8 1.4 1.2
Vitamin B6 (mg) 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.1
Folate (mcg) 200 800 46.5 2.4 2.1
Vitamin A (IU) 3609 51253 48763 0 0
Vitamin K (mcg) 315 603 2924 0 0

Source: Data was obtained from Nutritionist Pro Nutritional Analysis Software, Version 4.7, Axxya Systems , Stafford TX, 2012.

Please note that 100 calories of steak is only about one ounce, which is not much meat to fill you up. More typically, 4 – 8 ounces is eaten, supplying too many calories and too much animal protein without the lifespan enhancing micronutrients. Bottom line—eat more greens and less meat to get more micronutrient bang per caloric buck and to suppress your calorie intake.

“If All You Ate Were Potatoes, You’d Get All Your Amino Acids”

The sentence above is haunting me.

Doug asked:

“I still don’t understand why more care isn’t necessary to avoid deficiencies of the essential amino acids. Is it the case that these amino acids are present in all fruits and vegetables? (I didn’t think this was so, but you mentioned on that other thread that thinking has changed in this regard.) Or is it simply that easy to avoid a deficiency of an essential amino acid by consuming any mixture of fruits and vegetables?”

Doug, I would answer “Yes.” to your last question. I thought it summed up the facts well.

Plants are capable of manufacturing all 20 amino acids, which include the essential amino acids (EAAs), although amounts vary. I checked a number of foods (potatoes, broccoli, tomatoes, asparagus, corn, rice, oatmeal, beans, and others) and found all EAAs in each of these foods. Even an apple which is listed as having 0 grams of protein has all the EAAs, albeit it small amounts.

Since I said in an earlier comment, “No mixing of foods is necessary. If all you ate were potatoes, you’d get all your amino acids,” I felt obliged to back it up. Below is my back-up.

  • The first column lists all 8 EAAs for adults.
  • The second column lists the World Health Organization’s recommended intake per body weight.
  • The third column lists the specific RDI for a 120 lb adult.
  • The fourth column lists the amount of each AA in a medium potato, with skin.
  • The fifth column lists the amount of each AA in 5 medium potatoes.
  • The last column lists the % of recommended intake (for a 120 lb adult) for each AA when 5 potatoes are consumed.


Click for larger.- The WHO’s recommended intakes represent the minimum amount for an individual with the highest need, multiplied by a factor of 2 for safety.
– Methionine + Cysteine = Total Sulfur Amino Acids
– Phenylalanine + Tyrosine = Total Aromatic Amino Acids
– WHO: World Health Organization
– EAA: Essential Amino Acid

For a 120 pound adult, five potatoes (960 calories) supply over 100% of the recommended intake for all essential amino acids. They also supply 25 grams of total protein.
________
It’s pretty difficult for an adult to eat a plant-based, vegetarian diet that doesn’t provide all EAAs, as long as caloric needs are met.

Finally – The pool of AAs that our body uses to manufacture its own proteins isn’t limited by what we eat. Normal daily turnover of our cells provides a substantial pool from which to draw amino acids. Bacteria that line our colon also manufacture AAs, including EAAs, that we can utilize.

It is a misconception that plants provide “incomplete protein”, regardless of what Ms. Lappe advanced in her 1971 book, “Diet For A Small Planet.”

Liver Disease

Dr. McDougall's Health and Medical Center

Liver Disease, Hepatitis, and Liver Failure

Standard Practice:

The function of the liver is to detoxify and excrete a variety of substances consumed in the diet and waste products of our body’s metabolism. The liver also produces proteins necessary for the clotting of the blood and a protein called albumin that serves to keep fluid in the blood vessels. A failing liver results in the accumulation of breakdown products of metabolism, edema, and finally coma and death.

There are many causes of liver disease; the most common are infections with viruses and alcohol. Continuous injury with either of these agents results in permanent loss of liver tissue. One of the changes in the liver that occurs during injury is the accumulation of fat within the liver cells. This condition known as fatty infiltration commonly occurs in alcoholism, diabetes and obesity, and is in part due to a high-fat diet. With severe liver damage, liver cells are replaced by extensive scar tissue–the condition is known as cirrhosis of the liver.

Current Treatment:

Liver damage is first treated, whenever possible, by stopping drinking alcohol, especially when alcohol is the primary cause. The recommended diet for anyone suffering from liver disease is high in carbohydrate, low in protein, low in fat diet, and low in sodium.

Drugs are used to help control some of the complications of the ailing liver. Diuretics are often given to help relieve the edema and partially compensate for the patient’s poor compliance to a low-salt diet. Drugs, such as lactulose, decrease the absorption of protein from the intestine, and thereby further reduce the protein load to be handled by the liver. Steroids are sometimes used to decrease inflammation.

Drawbacks:

Medications deal primarily with symptoms and fail to prolong the patient’s life in most cases. Survival is not improved with the use of steroids and other antiinflammatory drugs. Unfortunately, strict adherence to a healthy diet is rarely encouraged by the physician until liver disease is far advanced. By this time there is too little liver left to make much of a difference.

The McDougall Program:

The McDougall Program: (Dietary and Lifestyle Implications):

The treatment of liver disease is primarily with a low-fat, low-protein, high-complex carbohydrate starch-based diet started early–long before liver failure is advanced. A healthier diet will relieve much of the burden on the diseased liver, since a large part of the liver’s function is to metabolize excess proteins, cholesterol, fats and additives from the diet. The low-fat quality of the McDougall diet helps relieve the fatty infiltration stage of the liver disease; there is a gradual disappearance of fat from the liver in four to eight weeks along with the improvement in diabetes and weight loss following the introduction of the diet. Progress can often be measured by reduction in the liver enzymes, SGOT and SGPT, seen by blood tests.

Current Therapy:

A person with liver failure must be as kind to his or her body as possible primarily by avoiding toxic substances and making food choices that are not excessive in fats and proteins. Low-sodium may be important in advanced liver failure to reduce fluid accumulation. Because all foods are naturally plentiful in protein it is often necessary to make-up as much as half the diet from “empty calories” foods in the form of simple sugars such as white sugar or corn syrup in order to dilute the protein content of the starches, vegetables and fruits to a tolerable level.

When Friends Ask: Where Do You Get Your Protein?

April 2007 Vol. 6, No. 4
When Friends Ask:
Where Do You Get Your Protein?

If you don’t know where you get your protein while following a plant-food-based diet, you’re in good company.  The Nutrition Committee of the American Heart Association, scientists from the Human Nutrition Research Center and Medical School at Tufts University, and registered dietitians, research nutritionists and physicians of Northwestern University, and the Harvard School of Public Health are just a few examples of “experts” you look to for advice who have the protein story wrong.1-4 Consequences of their shortfall are as grave as a lifetime of sickness and obesity, and premature death, for innocent people. These professionals must be held accountable.

Wrong Statements from the Experts 1-4
Although plant proteins form a large part of the human diet, most are deficient in 1 or more essential amino acids and are therefore regarded as incomplete proteins. (American Heart Association)

Plant protein sources, although good for certain essential amino acids, do not always offer all nine essential amino acids in a single given food. For example, legumes lack methionine, while grains lack lysine. (Tufts Human Nutrition Research Center)

Single plant protein foods usually are lower in protein quality than most animal proteins because they lack significant amounts of various essential amino acids. (Tufts University Medical School)

Other protein sources lack one or more amino acids that the body can’t make from scratch or create by modifying another amino acid. Called incomplete proteins, these usually come from fruits, vegetables, grains, and nuts. (Harvard School of Public Health)

Plant sources of protein (grains, legumes, nuts, and seeds) generally do not contain sufficient amounts of one or more of the essential amino acids. Thus protein synthesis can occur only to the extent that the limiting amino acids are available. (Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University)

Ignorance Sickens and Kills People

Don’t think it matters little if our public policy makers and educators remain ignorant about our nutritional needs. Misinformation leads to disastrous outcomes.  People have serious health problems like heart disease, type-2 diabetes, multiple sclerosis, and inflammatory arthritis that can be easily resolved by a diet based solely on plant foods. However, advice to make this dietary change may be withheld from you or a family member because of the erroneous fear that such a diet will result in a greater catastrophe, like a nutritional collapse from protein deficiency.

Consider this scenario:  Your loving husband of 35 years has a massive heart attack.  He recovers and both of you pledge you will do anything—even eat cardboard—in order to avoid a repeat experience.  On your first follow-up visit you tell your doctor that your family is going to follow a low-fat, vegan diet (all plant foods) from here on out.  Your doctor says, “You can’t do that; you will become protein deficient—plant foods are missing essential amino acids—you must eat meat and other high quality animal foods.”  Even though you vigorously explain meat, dairy, and eggs are the reasons you almost lost your husband, your doctor insists that you would be foolish to embark on such a course and defends that position with the writings of the Nutrition Committee of the American Heart Association.

The Nutrition Committee of the American Heart Association Has It Wrong

In an October 2001 research paper published in the Heart Association’s journal, Circulation, the Healthcare Professionals from the Nutrition Committee of the Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism wrote, “Although plant proteins form a large part of the human diet, most are deficient in 1 or more essential amino acids and are therefore regarded as incomplete proteins.”1 My letter to the editor correcting this often quoted, but incorrect information, about the adequacy of amino acids found in plants was published in the June 2002 issue of Circulation.5 Another letter from me in the November 2002 issue of Circulation demanded a correction.6  But, the head of the nutrition committee, Barbara Howard, PhD, would not admit she was wrong and used research from the world’s leading expert on protein, Professor Joe Millward, to defend her position.6

Joe Millward, PhD, Professor of Human Nutrition, University of Surrey (England), reviewed the published letters of disagreement between the American Heart Association (AHA) and myself, and wrote the following to me on July 10, 2003, “I thought I had made my position quite clear in my published papers. In an article I wrote for Encyclopedia of Nutrition (Millward DJ. 1998  Protein requirements. Encyclopedia of Nutrition. Academic Press pp  1661-1668) I said ‘Contrary to general opinion, the distinction between dietary protein sources in terms of the nutritional superiority of animal over plant proteins is much more difficult to demonstrate and less relevant in human nutrition.’  This is quite distinct from the AHA position which in my view is wrong.”7

I informed the American Heart Association about Dr. Millward’s position, but so far they have chosen to remain silent—and annually, 1.25 million people in the USA alone suffer with heart attacks—an often fatal condition entirely preventable by following a low-fat diet based solely on plant foods—all of which contain all of the essential amino acids in ideal amounts for humans.

Plants–the Original Sources of Protein and Amino Acids

Proteins are made from chains of 20 different amino acids that connect together in varying sequences—similar to how all the words in a dictionary are made from the same 26 letters.   Plants (and microorganisms) can synthesize all of the individual amino acids that are used to build proteins, but animals cannot.  There are 8 amino acids that people cannot make and thus, these must be obtained from our diets—they are referred to as “essential.”

After we eat our foods, stomach acids and intestinal enzymes digest the proteins into individual amino acids. These components are then absorbed through the intestinal walls into the bloodstream.  After entering the body’s cells, these amino acids are reassembled into proteins. Proteins function as structural materials which build the scaffoldings that maintain cell shapes, enzymes which catalyze biochemical reactions, and hormones which signal messages between cells—to name only a few of their vital roles.

Since plants are made up of structurally sound cells with enzymes and hormones, they are by nature rich sources of proteins.  In fact, so rich are plants that they can meet the protein needs of the earth’s largest animals: elephants, hippopotamuses, giraffes, and cows.  You would be correct to deduce that the protein needs of relatively small humans can easily be met by plants.

People Require Very Little Protein

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that men and women obtain 5% of their calories as protein.  This would mean 38 grams of protein for a man burning 3000 calories a day and 29 grams for a woman using 2300 calories a day.  This quantity of protein is impossible to avoid when daily calorie needs are met by unrefined starches and vegetables. For example, rice alone would provide 71 grams of highly useable protein and white potatoes would provide 64 grams of protein.8

Our greatest time of growth—thus, the time of our greatest need for protein—is during our first 2 years of life—we double in size. At this vigorous developmental stage our ideal food is human milk, which is 5% protein.  Compare this need to food choices that should be made as adults—when we are not growing. Rice is 8% protein, corn 11%, oatmeal 15%, and beans 27%.8  Thus protein deficiency is impossible when calorie needs are met by eating unprocessed starches and vegetables.

The healthy active lives of hundreds of millions of people laboring in Asia, Africa, and Central and South America on diets with less than half the amount of protein eaten by Americans and Europeans prove that the popular understanding of our protein needs is seriously flawed.

WHO Recommendations:
(With a wide safety margin)
   
Men: 5%
Women: 5%
Pregnant: 6%
   
Percent of Calories of Proteins16
(Selected Foods)
Food % Protein
   
Grains & Flours:  
Cornmeal 9
Brown Rice 9
Oatmeal 15
White Rice 7
Whole Wheat Flour 16
White Flour 11
   
Starchy Vegetables  
Black Beans 27
Cassava 10
Corn 11
Kidney Beans 27
Peas 28
Potato 8
Sweet Potato 7
   
Green Vegetables
Asparagus 42
Broccoli 42
Carrots 10
Lettuce 40
Onions 32
Mushrooms 12
Spinach 51
   
Animal Foods
Beef 53
Chicken 46
Pork 29
Salmon 43
Whole Milk 21
Skim Milk 39
Human Milk 5
Cheddar Cheese 25
Cottage Cheese 68
Egg 32
   

Faulty Observations Lead to High Protein Recommendations

People commonly believe: the more protein consumed the better.  This faulty thinking dates back to the late 1800s, and was established without any real scientific research.  An assumption was made that people who could afford to do so would instinctively select a diet containing the right amount of protein. After observing the diets of laborers, soldiers, and workers in Western Europe and the USA, recommendations of 100 and 189 grams of protein a day were established.9  People’s innate ability to select a proper diet is disproved by the present day popularity of burger joints, donut shops, and pizza parlors.

Further confusion about our protein needs came from studies of the nutritional needs of animals.  For example, Mendel and Osborne in 1913 reported rats grew better on animal, than on vegetable, sources of protein. A direct consequence of their studies resulted in meat, eggs, and dairy foods being classified as superior, or “Class A” protein sources and vegetable proteins designated as inferior, or “Class B” proteins.9  Seems no one considered that rats are not people.  One obvious difference in their nutritional needs is rat milk is 11 times more concentrated in protein than is human breast milk.  The extra protein supports this animal’s rapid growth to adult size in 5 months; while humans take 17 years to fully mature.

The recent popularity of high protein diets has further popularized the fallacy that “more protein is good for you.”  True, high protein diets, like Atkins, will make you sick enough to lose your appetite and temporarily lose weight, but this fact should not be extrapolated to mean high protein is healthy—in fact, the opposite is true.

The Truth Has Been Known for More than a Century

In 1903, the head of Yale’s department of biochemistry, Professor Russell Henry Chittenden, reported profound health benefits gained by cutting popular recommendations for protein held at his time by half to two-thirds (from 150 grams to 50 grams daily).  His research included detailed dietary histories and laboratory studies of his subjects.9

In the 1940s, William Rose performed experiments on people which found daily minimum protein needs to be about 20 grams a day.  Further research on men found single plant foods consumed in an amount sufficient to meet daily needs easily met these human requirements for all 8 essential amino acids.9  (A more detailed discussion of the history of protein recommendations is found in my December 2003 newsletter article:  A Brief History of Protein: Passion, Social Bigotry, and Enlightenment.)

The results of Dr. Rose’s studies are summarized in the following chart, under “minimum requirements”.  From the chart, it is clear that vegetable foods contain more than enough of all the amino acids essential for humans.10

(grams per day)
Amino Acids
Rose’s Minimum Requirement Rose’s Recommend Requirement Corn Brown
rice
Oatmeal
flakes
Wheat
flour
White
beans
Potatoes Sweet
potatoes
Tryptophan .25 .50 .66 .71 1.4 1.4 1.8 .8 .8
Phenylalaline .28 .56 6.13 3.1 5.8 5.9 10.9 3.6 2.5
Leucine 1.10 2.20 12.0 5.5 8.1 8.0 17.0 4.1 2.6
Isoleucine .7 1.4 4.1 3.0 5.6 5.2 11.3 3.6 2.2
Lysine .8 1.6 4.1 2.5 4.0 3.2 14.7 4.4 2.1
Vailine .8 1.6 6.8 4.5 6.4 5.5 12.1 4.4 3.4
Methionine .11 .22 2.1 1.1 1.6 1.8 2.0 1.0 .8
Threonine .5 1.0 4.5 2.5 3.6 3.5 8.5 3.4 2.1
Total Protein 20 37 (WHO) 109 64 108 120 198 82 45
(grams per day)
Amino Acids
Taro Asparagus Broccoli Tomatoes Pumpkin Beef Club Steak Egg Milk
Tryptophan 1.0 3.9 3.8 1.4 1.5 3.1 3.8 2.3
Phenylalaline 3.0 10.2 12.2 4.3 3.0 11.2 13.9 7.7
Leucine 5.2 14.6 16.5 6.1 6.0 22.4 21. 15.9
Isoleucine 3.0 11.9 12.8 4.4 4.3 14.3 15.7 10.3
Lysine 3.4 15.5 14.8 6.3 5.5 23.9 15.3 12.5
Vailine 3.5 16.0 17.3 4.2 4.3 15.1 17.7 11.7
Methionine .6 5.0 5.1 1.1 1.0 6.8 7.4 3.9
Threonine 2.7 9.9 12.5 4.9 2.7 12.1 12. 7.4
Total Protein 58 330 338 150 115 276 238 160

You Don’t Need Beans or to “Combine” Your Foods

Many investigators have measured the capacity of plant foods to satisfy protein needs. Their findings show that children and adults thrive on diets based on single or combined starches, and grow healthy and strong.10Furthermore, no improvement has been found from mixing plant foods or supplementing them with amino acid mixtures to make the combined amino acid pattern look more like that of flesh, milk, or eggs. In fact, supplementing a food with an amino acid in order to conform to a contrived reference standard can create amino acid imbalances. For example, young children fed diets based on wheat or corn and supplemented with the amino acids tryptophan and methionine in order to conform to the standard requirements set by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) developed negative responses in terms of nitrogen balance (the body’s utilization of protein).10

People who are worried about getting sufficient protein will sometimes ask me if they can still follow the McDougall Diet if they do not like beans.  From the chart above, you will notice that any single starch or vegetable will provide in excess of our needs for total protein and essential amino acids—thus there is no reason to rely on beans or make any efforts to food combine different plant foods to improve on Nature’s own marvelous creations.

Potatoes Alone Suffice

Many populations, for example people in rural Poland and Russia at the turn of the 19th century, have lived in very good health doing extremely hard work with the white potato serving as their primary source of nutrition. One landmark experiment carried out in 1925 on two healthy adults, a man 25 years old and a woman 28 years old had them live on a diet primarily of white potatoes for 6 months. (A few additional items of little nutritional value except for empty calories—pure fats, a few fruits, coffee, and tea—were added to their diet.)11  The report stated, “They did not tire of the uniform potato diet and there was no craving for change.”  Even though they were both physically active (especially the man) they were described as, “…in good health on a diet in which the nitrogen (protein) was practically solely derived from the potato.”

The potato is such a great source of nutrition that it can supply all of the essential protein and amino acids for young children in times of food shortage.  Eleven Peruvian children, ages 8 months to 35 months, recovering from malnutrition, were fed diets where all of the protein and 75% of the calories came from potatoes.  (Soybean-cottonseed oils and pure simple sugars, neither of which contains protein, vitamins, or minerals, provided some of the extra calories.)12  Researchers found that this simple potato diet provided all the protein and essential amino acids to meet the needs of growing and small children.

Excess Protein Causes Diseases of Over-nutrition

Unlike fat, protein cannot be stored.  When it is consumed in excess of our needs, protein is broken down mostly by the liver, and partly by the kidneys and muscles. Consumption in excess of our needs overworks the liver and kidneys, and can cause accumulation of toxic protein byproducts.

Proteins are made of amino acids, and are, therefore, acidic by nature.  Animal proteins are abundant in sulfur-containing amino acids which break down into very powerful sulfuric acid. These kinds of amino acids are abundant in hard cheese, red meat, poultry, seafood, and eggs, and their acids must be neutralized by buffers found in the bones. The bones dissolve to release the buffering materials; eventually resulting in a condition of weakened bones, known as osteoporosis.  Released bone materials often settle and coalesce in the kidney system, causing kidney stones.  Fruits and vegetables are largely alkaline, preserving bone health and preventing kidney stones.13 (A more detailed discussion of the health consequences from excess protein is found in my January 2004 newsletter article: Protein Overload.)

Diseases of over-nutrition are directly connected to planet health, too.  Recommendations to eat animal foods for protein have resulted in an environmental catastrophe.  Livestock produces 18% of the greenhouse gases; these food-animals occupy 26 percent of the ice-free surface of the Earth and 33 percent of the total arable land is used to produce their food. One telling tragedy is they account for the deforestation of 70 percent of Amazon rainforests, which act as the “lungs of the Earth.”14 (A more detailed discussion of the environmental damage from livestock is found in my December 2006 newsletter article:  An Inconvenient Truth: We Are Eating Our Planet To Death.)

Protein Deficiency Is Really Food Deficiency

How many cases of the so-called “protein deficiency state,” kwashiorkor, have you seen? I have never seen a case, even though I have known thousands of people on a plant-food based diet.  How about those starving children in Africa?  The picture one often sees of stick-thin children with swollen bellies in famine areas of Asia or Africa is actually one of starvation and is more accurately described as “calorie deficiency.”10  When these children come under medical supervision, they are nourished back to health with their local diets of corn, wheat, rice, and/or beans.  Children recovering from starvation grow up to l8 times faster than usual and require a higher protein content to provide for their catch-up in development—and plant foods easily provide this extra amount of protein.10 Even very-low protein starchy root crops, such as cassava root, are sufficient enough in nutrients, including protein, to keep people healthy.15

Starving People Die of Fat, Not Protein, Deficiency

In 1981, 10 Irish prisoners from the Republican Army (IRA) went on a hunger strike. Nine out of 10 of these men died between 57 and 73 days (mean of 61.6 days) of starvation after losing about 40% of their body weights (the remaining striker died of complications of a gunshot wound).16,17  This experience gave doctors a chance to observe first hand the metabolic changes that occur during starvation. Protein stores were generally protected during starvation, with most of the energy to stay alive being derived from the men’s fat stores. It was estimated that the hunger strikers had lost up to 94% of their body-fat levels, but only 19% of their body-protein levels at the time of death.16 They died when they ran out of fat.  Since fat is more critical than protein, people should be asking, “Where do you get your fat (on any diet)?

Since Nature designed her plant foods complete, with abundant amounts of fat, protein, carbohydrates, vitamins and minerals, “Where you get a specific nutrient?” is almost never a relevant question, as long as there is enough to eat.  So, why have scientists, dietitians, medical doctors, diet-book authors, and the lay public become fixated on a non-existent problem?  Protein is synonymous with eating meat, poultry, fish, dairy, and eggs—the foods traditionally consumed by the wealthier people in a society—thus, protein-eating means higher social status.  High-protein foods are also high-profit foods. Therefore, propagating the protein myth is motivated by egos and money—and the usual consequences of pain and suffering follow closely behind these two human frailties.

References:

1) St Jeor S, Howard B, Prewitt E. Dietary protein and weight reduction: a statement for healthcare professionals from the Nutrition Committee of the Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism of the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2001; 104: 1869–1874.

2) Tufts University:  http://www.thedoctorwillseeyounow.com/articles/nutrition/protein_2/
http://www.quackwatch.org/03HealthPromotion/vegetarian.html

3) Harvard School of Public Health: http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/protein.html

4) Northwestern University:  http://www.feinberg.northwestern.edu/nutrition/factsheets/protein.html

5) McDougall J. Plant foods have a complete amino acid composition.  Circulation. 2002 Jun 25;105(25):e197; author reply e197.

6) McDougall J.  Misinformation on plant proteins. Circulation. 2002 Nov 12;106(20):e148; author reply e148.

7) Personal Communication with John McDougall, MD on July 10, 2003.

8) J Pennington.  Bowes & Church’s Food Values of Portions Commonly Used.  17th Ed. Lippincott. Philadelphia- New York. 1998.

9)  The December 2003 McDougall Newsletter: A Brief History of Protein: Passion, Social Bigotry, and Enlightenment.

10) McDougall J.  The McDougall Plan. New Win Publ. 1983; pages 95-109.

11) Kon S.  XXXV. The value of whole potato in human nutrition.  Biochemical J.  1928; 22:258-260

12) Lopez de Romana G.  Fasting and postprandial plasma free amino acids of infants and children consuming exclusively potato protein. J Nutr. 1981 Oct;111(10):1766-71.

13) The January 2004 McDougall Newsletter: Protein Overload.

14)  The December 2006 McDougall Newsletter: An Inconvenient Truth: We Are Eating Our Planet To Death.

15) Millward DJ.  The nutritional value of plant-based diets in relation to human amino acid and protein requirements.  Proc Nutr Soc. 1999 May;58(2):249-60.

16)  Leiter LA, Marliss EB. Survival during fasting may depend on fat as well as protein stores. JAMA 1982;248:2306

17) Zimmerman MD, Appadurai K, Scott JG, Jellett LB, Garlick FH.  Survival. Ann Intern Med. 1997 Sep 1;127(5):405-9.

How Plant-Based Diets May Extend Our Lives

News

July 10, 2014 by Michael Greger M.D. in News with 5 Comments

How a Plant Based Diet May Help you Live Longer

A recent review suggested that plant-based diets may prove to be a useful nutritional strategy for lifespan extension in part because they tend to be naturally low in the amino acid methionine (see my video Starving Cancer with Methionine Restriction). Apparently, the less methionine there is in body tissues, the longer different animals tend to live. But what are the possible implications for humans? See my video Methionine Restriction as a Life Extension Strategy.

I’ve talked before about the free radical theory of aging, the concept that aging can be thought of as the oxidation of our bodies just like rust is the oxidation of metal (seeMitochondrial Theory of Aging). Methionine is thought to have a pro-oxidant effect. The thinking is that lowering methionine intake leads to less free radical production, thereby slowing aging. Fewer free radicals would decrease the rate of DNA damage, which would curtail the rate of DNA mutation, slowing the rate of aging and disease and potentially increasing our lifespan.

There are three ways to lower methionine intake: The first is caloric restriction. By decreasing our overall intake of food, we would reduce our intake of methionine. Or, because methionine is found protein, we could practice protein restriction, eating a relatively protein deficient diet. The third option is eat enough food, eat enough protein, but just stick to proteins that are relatively low in methionine, which tends to mean plant proteins.

Caloric restriction is hard, because we walk around starving all the time. Something like every-other-day eating is described as “never likely to gain much popularity as a pro-longevity strategy for humans, so it may be more feasible to achieve moderate methionine restriction by eating a plant-based diet.” On a population-wide level, folks could benefit from just lowering their protein intake, period. Researchers noted that “the mean intake of proteins [and thus methionine] of Western human populations is much higher than needed. Therefore, decreasing such levels has a great potential to lower tissue oxidative stress and to increase healthy life span in humans while avoiding the possible undesirable effects of caloric restriction.”

We’re eating around double the protein we need, so the first thing doctors can recommend is to decrease the intake of protein, but we can also get our methionine even lower by eating a plant-based diet.

The fact that beans have comparably low methionine has been classically considered a disadvantage. But, given the capacity of methionine restriction to decrease the rate of free radical generation in internal organs, to lower markers of chronic disease, and to increase maximum longevity, this “disadvantage” may actually be a strong advantage. This fits well with the important role of beans in healthy diets like the traditional Mediterranean diet. Interestingly, soy protein is also especially poor in methionine, which may help explain the healthy effects iof soyfoods. Watch my video Increased Lifespan from Beans.

The reason why plant-based diets are so protective is not known. Yes, vegetables contain thousands of phytochemicals, but separately investigating their possible protective roles would be an impossible task. The idea that the protective effect is not due to any of the individual plant food components, but to a synergic “combined effect” is gaining acceptance. However, based on the relationship of excess dietary methionine to vital organ toxicity, as well as its likely mechanism of action through increases in free radical generation, the possibility exists that the protective effects of plant-based diets can be due, at least in part, to their lower methionine content. As one paper concluded, “The low-methionine content of vegan diets may make methionine restriction feasible as a life extension strategy.”

Plant-based diets can also mimic other benefits of caloric restriction, such as improving levels of the “fountain of youth” hormone DHEA. See The Benefits of Caloric Restriction Without the Actual Restricting.

Americans are living longer but sicker lives. That’s why we need a diet and lifestyle that supports health and longevity. I have a whole presentation on the role diet can play in preventing, arresting, and even reversing many of our top 15 killers: Uprooting the Leading Causes of Death.

I’ve touched previously on the irony that animal protein may be detrimental for the same reasons it’s touted as superior in Higher Quality May Mean Higher Risk.

-Michael Greger, M.D.

Rice Diet Founder Dr. Walter Kempner

In 1934 as a doctor at Duke Hospital, Dr. Walter Kempner starting treating patients with malignant hypertension (very high blood pressure) and kidney disease with what he called “The Rice Diet” when there was no other treatment available anywhere. He gave it the name as patients usually ate a bowl of white rice at every meal. It became obvious to Dr. Kempner that the prevention and treatment of these diseases would be best treated with a no salt added diet. Dr. Kempner found out very early that the low fat content of the diet also enhanced weight loss. When Dr. Kempner tried to have patients maintain their weight by increasing portion size and adding sugars to foods, patients still lost weight. They just couldn’t eat enough calories with so little fat in the diet. The program has continued over the years with the same philosophy of a low-sodium, low-fat diet.

In the 1930′s and 40′s, people that were diagnosed with illnesses such as high blood pressure and kidney disease were offered no hope for long-term survival. These diseases were considered lethal. Dr. Kempner experimented with animal tissue for many years and began to treat human patients in 1939. He began to see unprecedented results starting with a woman who reversed her kidney disease in a few months time and another who was comatose with malignant hypertension who regained alertness. There were no other drugs or treatments available other than this diet.
Dr. Kempner went on to research and publish revolutionary results on the Rice Diet’s dramatic beneficial effect not only on kidney disease and hypertension, but on cholesterol, cardiovascular disease, congestive heart failure and diabetes. He retired in 1992 in his 90th year (as Dr. Kempner would say) and he passed away in 1997. The Rice Diet has continued to produce these significant improvements and outstanding medical results for these diseases along with other disorders of lifestyle origin such as sleep apnea, psoriasis, pulmonary hypertension, edema and joint stiffness associated with arthritis.
Here are some of Dr. Kempner’s articles from his bulletins and other journals:
• Treatment of Heart and Kidney Disease and of Hypertensive and Arteriosclerotic Vascular Disease with The Rice Diet (1949)
• Kempner’s Research on Diseases of Blood Vessels, Kidneys, and Heart (1950)
• Treatment of Heart Disease and Kidney Disease with the Rice Diet (April 1951)
• Clinical Notes and The Patient’s Viewpoint (April 1953)
• Progress Report (August 1954)
• Family History (August 1954)
• Analysis of 177 Cases of Hypertensive Vascular Disease (1955)
• The Changing Attitude Toward Vascular Disease (June 1955)
• Who Wants Salt? (June 1955)
• “A Girl with a New Lease on Life” (June 1955)
• Why Rice? (1956)
• How to Be Happy with Rice (August 1956)
• Effect of Rice Diet on Diabetes Mellitus Associated with Vascular Disease (1958)
• Nephritis. Nephrosis. (1958)
• Coronary Artery Disease (1960)
• Diabetes (1962)
• Proofs for Optimism (June 1972)
• Metabolic Diseases: Research, Diagnosis, Treatment (June 1972)
• The Deadly Role of Salt in Kidney Disease (June 1972)
• Obesity (June 1972)
• Sodium-Restricted Diet (June 1972)
• Walter Kempner: A Biographical Note (1974)
• The Rice Diet: Forty Years of Progress (October 1982)
• The Importance of Oxygen Concentration (October 1982)
• The Rice Diet and Arthritis (October 1982)
• “Out of A Clear Blue Sky…” (October 1982)
• Notes of Interest: Cirrhosis of the Liver (October 1982)
• Disappearance of Psoriatic Lesions on the Rice Diet (1986)
• The Sodium/Diabetes Connection (June 1993)
• What the Fireflies Taught Us More Than 50 Years Ago (June 1993)
>> Publications by Dr. Kempner: Additional Listings

The War On Cancer


This article is part of the Center for Media & Democracy’s spotlight onglobal corporations.

In 1971, many sponsors of the War on Cancer predicted a cure by 1976. Instead, this multibillion dollar research program has proven to be a failure.

Contents

[hide]

Overview

The age adjusted total cancer mortality rate climbed steadily for decades until the early 1990s, when the rate started to fall slowly, due largely to reduced smoking. To encourage continued support for cancer research, now exceeding two billion dollars annually in the U.S. alone; researchers and administrators have misled the public. In 1987, the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) found that the statistics from the National Cancer Institute (NCI) “artificially inflate the amount of ‘true’ progress”, concluding that even simple five-year survival statistics were manipulated. The NCI termed five-year survival a “cure” even if the patient died of the cancer after the five-year period. Also, by ignoring well known statistical biases, the NCI falsely suggested advances had been made in certain cancer therapies. [1]

Failure of toxic “therapies”

In 1971 when the U.S. declared war on cancer, scientists still hadn’t identified the immune defense system. Doctors and scientists, along with the American Cancer Society, continue to refer to a non-contagious condition with no incubation period or identifiable foreign invader as a “disease”. Scientists have requested and received billions in grants from the federal government, non-profit organizations, corporate and private donors. However, according to critics, like the New England Journal of Medicine, the “war on cancer” is a failure. According to John C. Bailar III, M.D., Ph.D., Chairman of the Dept. of Epidemiology & Biostatistics at McGill University:

“Despite $30 billion spent on research since 1970, cancer remains undefeated, with a death rate not lower but actually higher than when they started. The effect of new treatments for cancer has been largely disappointing. The failure of chemotherapy to control cancer has become apparent even to the oncology establishment.” [2]

The late Professor of Medical Physics, H.B. Jones, was a leading U.S. cancer statistician. In a 1969 speech to the American Cancer Society, he stated that studies had not proved that chances of survival were improved by early intervention. In fact, according to his studies, untreated persons with cancer lived up to four times longer and with a better quality of life than treated ones. He was not invited back. According to the prestigious British medical journal, The Lancet:

“If one were to believe all the media hype, the triumphalism of the medical profession in published research, and the almost weekly miracle breakthroughs trumpeted by the cancer charities, one might be surprised that women are dying at all from breast cancer.” [3]

Cancer for profit

According to the oncologist, Glen Warner, M.D.:

“We have a multi-billion dollar industry that is killing people, right and left, just for financial gain. Their idea of research is to see whether two doses of this poison is better than three doses of that poison.” [4]

NCI & clinical trials for hydrazine sulfate

According to “The $200 Billion Scam”, published in Penthouse in 1997:

“In the 25 years since the federal government declared War on Cancer, an estimated $200 billion has been spent by U.S. taxpayers and private investors on research that has produced so little bang for the buck that it makes the Pentagon’s $600 toilet seats look like bargains for every American home. The cancer industry has become a huge jobs program for brilliant, even highly motivated, doctors and other scientists, whose efforts are misguided by the economic forces behind the industry. Directly put, it’s in the interests of all the fat cats in government and private enterprise who earn their living and status from what is largely a failed enterprise, to stick with it. That is why a drug like hydrazine sulfate is dumped on by the cancer establishment, instead of given legitimate support and honest evaluation.”

The General Accounting Office (GAO) defied logic, reason, and science to give its blessing to the NCI’s deliberately biased testing of hydrazine sulfate which produced false results to make it appear ineffective. NCI higher administrators who wrote the report also and ignored evidence pointing to rigged clinical trials. [5]

American Cancer Society

The American Cancer Society ACS is largest non-religious charity in the world. As of the fiscal year ending in August of 2007, the ACS had a net revenue 1.17 billion dollars. [6] ACS’s daily expenditures exceed one million dollars with only approximately 16% going into patient cancer programs. The rest is funneled into expensive research and bureaucratic overhead. Meager prevention programs are designed not to offend the industry. The average American diagnosed with cancer spend upwards of $25,000 of their savings on cures to save or lengthen their lives. However, claims of ‘progress’ include many people with benign diseases. Those in remission for longer than 5 years are declared cured, although many of those will die from either cancer or treatment after five years. [7] Corporate donors include processed food industryand pharmaceutical industry giants like PfizerSanofi-AventisAstraZenecaNovartis and Walmart as well as Metropolitan Life Insurance[8]

Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

A look at financial relationships between large facilities such as the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) and corporations making billions in profits from chemotherapy drugs, is extremely telling as to its continued use in the face of such failure. Furthermore, expensive laboratories and diagnostic equipment have already been paid for by large corporations.

Craig B. Thompson, MD President and CEO of MSKCC, is also on the Board of Directors for Merck Corporation.[9]

James D. Robinson III Honorary Chairman, is also former Chairman of Bristol-Myers Squibb, the world’s largest producer of chemo drugs. Paul Marks, MD, MSKCC’s former President and CEO, is the former Director of Pfizer. Another board member, Richard Furlaud, recently retired as Bristol Myers’ president. [10]

The late Richard Gelb was Vice-Chairman of the MSKCC board as well as CEO of Bristol-Myers. [11][12]

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is the primary agency in the U.S. government conducting and funding medical research. MSKCC Director Thomas Kelly, M.D., Ph.D. serves on the both the NIH Advisory Committee and Scientific Management Review Board. [13]

Cancer United

Cancer United is a pharmaceutical industry front group established by the Weber Shandwick public relations firm. It is funded entirely by Roche[14]

Cancer & animal testing

More is spent on cancer than any other medical problem. There are more people living off of cancer than cancer sufferers.Millions of laboratory animals, including rats, mice, monkeys, guinea pigs, cats and dogs have been injected with cancerous material or implanted with malignancies.[15][16] Why hasn’t progress been commensurate with the effort and money invested? One explanation is the unwarranted preoccupation with animal testing. Crucial genetic, molecular, immunologic and cellular differences have disqualify animal models as an effective means to a cure. Mice are most commonly used, although “Mice are actually poor models of the majority of human cancers”; according to the industry’s own laboratory animal publication. According to leading cancer researcher, Robert Weinberg:

“The preclinical (animal) models of human cancer, in large part, stink… Hundreds of millions of dollars are being wasted every year by drug companies using these models.” [17]

A widely discussed 2004 article in Fortune magazine entitled “Why We’re Losing the War on Cancer” [18] laid the blame on animal research. The basic approach in the 1970s was to grow human cancer cells in a lab dish, transplant them into a mouse whose immune system had been tweaked to not reject them and throw experimental drugs at them to see what happened. However, few successes in mice are relevant to people. According to Fran Visco, who founded the National Breast Cancer Coalition four years after being diagnosed with cancer in 1987, “Animals don’t reflect the reality of cancer in humans. We cure cancer in animals all the time, but not in people.”

Newsweek combed through three decades of high-profile successes in mice for clues to why the mice lived and the people died. According to oncologist Paul Bunn, who leads the International Society for the Study of Lung Cancer:

“Animal models have not been very predictive of how well drugs would do in people. We put a human tumor under the mouse’s skin, and that micro-environment doesn’t reflect a person’s—the blood vessels, inflammatory cells or cells of the immune system.”

Human tumors that scientists transplant into mice and then attack with their weapon du jour, almost never metastasize. For decades, scientists ignored metastatic cells (which are responsible for 90% of all cancer deaths) because metastasis didn’t occur in animal models. Throughout the 1980’s and 90’s, researchers focused on increasingly detailed molecular mechanisms, instead of looking into the real problem. [19] See also animal testing.

Cancer & diet

Food Additives & adulteration

Today, over 6,000 synthetic chemicals are officially condoned for use in the processed food industry. These include some that are known carcinogens. Processed foods contain high levels of the debilitating, denatured ingredients such as white sugar, refined starch, pasteurized cow’s milk, land mined salt and hydrogenated vegetable oils. The human immune system correctly recognizes chemical food additives as toxic foreign agents and attempts to rid the body of them; thus causing severe biochemical reactions and stress on the immune system.

After years of daily exposure to inorganic chemicals, the immune system breaks down and burns out, leaving the body vulnerable to microbes, toxins and cancerous cells. The food industry has duped the public and government health agencies into believing that their products are safe for human consumption; even in the face of abundant scientific evidence to the contrary. In fact, such information is in the public domain and openly available to anyone who seeks it.[20] See also processed food industry.

Animal products & health issues

The China Study culminated a 20-year partnership of Cornell University, Oxford University, and the Chinese Academy of Preventive Medicine. The survey of diseases and lifestyle factors in rural China and Taiwan is widely thought to be the most comprehensive study on nutrition and related diseases to date. The project produced over 8,000 statistically significant associations between diet and disease. The findings indicated that the consumers of the most animal-based foods suffered the most chronic diseases while those with the most plant based diets avoided these diseases and were the healthiest. Chronic diseases included heart disease, diabetes and cancer. Also studied were the effects of diet in reducing or reversing the risks of chronic disease. The study also examines the source of nutritional confusion produced by powerful lobbies, government entities and irresponsible scientists. [21] According to Dr. T. Colin Campbell of Cornell, “we’re basically a vegetarian species, should be eating a wide variety of plant foods and minimizing animal foods.” [22][23]

The focus of published reports on dairy consumption are infections, colic, intestinal bleeding, anemia, allergies and more serious issues of diabetes and viral infections of bovine leukemia, an AIDS like virus. Common childrens issues include ear infections, tonsil infections, bed wetting and asthma. Adult issues include heart disease, arthritis, respiratory distress, osteoporosis, leukemia, lymphoma and cancer. Overall health issues include milk contamination by pus cells and chemicals such as pesticides. [24] Most cows’ milk contains toxins such as herbicides, pesticides and dioxins and up to 52 powerful antibiotics; blood, pus, feces, bacteria and viruses. Both organic and non-organic milk contain fat, cholesteral and various allergens as well as 59 active hormones. This includes the powerful Growth Factor One (IGF-1) which has been identified in the rapid growth cancer. [25] It has been positively documented and affirmed that dairy consumption leads to clogged arteries, heart attacks and strokes and exposure to contaminants. [26][27] Research has demonstrated a calcium wash or a loss of calcium and other critical minerals like potassium, magnesium and iron from the blood stream as a direct result of dairy consumption starting at 24 ounces per day. [28] Low animal protein diets create a positive calcium balance, whereas high animal protein diets create a negative balance resulting in bone density loss. While many have turned to low fat dairy products, these products contain higher concentrations of protein. Low fat and particularly non-fat dairy products have actually been shown to increase osteoporosis, kidney problems and some cancers. [29]

See also meat & dairy industry, sections 4 & 5 & section 6 on animal products & health issues.