On Jun 6, 3:03*am, Bruce <parkerbruc...[at]gmail.com> wrote:
- quote -

There are better high fat low carb diets than Atkins.

If one is willing to cook up a little wheat bran,
this cereal fiber won't blow up carb limit in such a diet
if used in moderation. Some suggest oat bran
though it is quite high in carbs.

On Jun 14, 2:45*pm, Laurie <n...[at]spam.com> wrote:
- quote -

http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/reprint/34/9/1893 indicates that meat protein
is more digestible than bean protein.

The human body naturally has bacteria in the intestines and it's
beneficial. If anything, by not consuming fruit, vegetables, beans,
and grains, the Atkins diet would have an inadequate amount of fiber
to beed those beneficial bacteria.

--
Ron

Ron Peterson wrote:

- quote -

plants or animals.
Unfortunately, you understanding of protein digestion
is too simple and it leads you to false conclusions.
The foul smelling feces of the human meat eater is
powerful evidence that animal proteins are not digested
well, and putrefactive bacteria in the large intestine
consume the undigested animal protein to produce foul
smelling amine
(-NH2) compounds. These include such highly-characteristic,
odors in the form of toxic amines, such as indole, skatol,
indican, putrescine [NH2(CH2)4NH2], and cadaverine
[NH2(CH2)5NH2] (all from tryptophan), neurine, and
ptomatropine, is clear evidence that their proteins were not
digested properly, for if they had been, there would be no
amines, or residual nitrogen, for the putrefactive bacteria
in the colon to metabolize to produce these odors. Properly
digested proteins would produce no offensive amine
compounds, since all the protein would have been digested to
amino acids which are absorbed into the body, leaving none
in the colon to support the putrefactive bacteria.
http://ecologos.org/denature.htm

- quote -

both animals and plants?
The fats in animals and plants are very different,
just as their respective proteins are very, very different
in structure and function.
http://ecologos.org/ttdd.html#meat

TCCampbell’s study can not be ignored, at least not by
rational folks.

Laurie

On Jun 11, 1:05 pm, Susan <neverm...[at]nomail.com> wrote:
- quote -

If we weren't supposed to think, we wouldn't have a brain.

- quote -

Do a pubmed search on "vegan cancer" to check your claim.

A very-low-fat vegan diet increases intake of protective dietary
factors and decreases intake of pathogenic dietary factors.
There is increasing evidence that dietary factors in plant-based diets
are important in the prevention of chronic disease.
J Am Diet Assoc. 2008 Feb;108(2):347-56.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1...ubmed_RVDocSum

Biol Pharm Bull. 2008 Mar;31(3):534-7.
The flavouring phytochemical 2-pentanone reduces prostaglandin
production and COX-2 expression in colon cancer cells.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1...ubmed_RVDocSum

"However, people on a low-protein, low-calorie diet had considerably
lower levels of a particular plasma growth factor called IGF-1 than
equally lean endurance runners," says the study's first author Luigi
Fontana, M.D., Ph.D., assistant professor of medicine at Washington
University and an investigator at the Istituto Superiore di Sanità in
Rome, Italy. "That suggests to us that a diet lower in protein may
have a greater protective effect against cancer than endurance
exercise, independently of body fat mass."
http://mednews.wustl.edu/news/page/normal/8388.html

- quote -

Then do a search for "meat cancer" or "dairy cancer" to contrast. Just
go down the list or randomly pick recent studies.

“This case-control study examined different food groups in relation to
breast cancer. Between 2002 and 2004, 437 cases and 922 controls
matched according to age and area of residence were interviewed. Diet
was measured by a validated food frequency questionnaire”… “Breast
cancer risk increased by 56% for each additional 100 g/day of meat
consumption.”
Nutr Cancer 2008 Mar-Apr;60(2):177-87.

“The breast cancer (BC) death rate in Oklahoma exceeds that of the
United States.
OBJECTIVE: To assess dietary changes of BC survivors….. Only 30% of
women received any specific dietary advice from their physician, but
over half said they would like more information. Most common dietary
changes included decreased consumption of sugar, sweets, and regular
soda, red meats, shortening, margarine, high fat dairy products, and
alcohol.
Okla State Med Assoc 2008 Jan;101(1):15-9.

"Higher intake of meats, particularly red meats, and lower intake of
vegetables were associated with an increased risk of esophageal
adenocarcinoma, while higher intake of meats, particularly poultry,
and high-fat dairy was associated with increased risk of gastric
cardia adenocarcinoma".
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1...ubmed_RVDocSum

On Jun 13, 4:15 pm, Laurie <n...[at]spam.com> wrote:
- quote -

A clearly fallacious argument.

- quote -

It's not a peer reviewed scientific study.

- quote -

Since the human digestion breaks down proteins into amino acids, it
shouldn't matter whether the protein comes from plants or animals.

Fats are composed of fatty acids, so which fatty acids do you think
are harmful? Aren't those fatty acids available in both animals and
plants?

--
Ron

On Jun 13, 4:15 pm, Laurie <n...[at]spam.com> wrote:
- quote -

Here is a site that is just overflowing with real science. Tons of
cites.

http://www.westonaprice.org/splash_2.htm

Susan wrote:

- quote -

http://tinyurl.com/2v689m
video
http://tinyurl.com/6lcda6

discovered that the human consumption of animal proteins and
animal fats was THE cause of currently-popular "degenerative
diseases".

- quote -

for a summary of animal flesh consumption and various
'diseases'.
You, and any honest person, will have to
agree that the evidence is pretty much undeniable; at
least for those who value science and logic.
Believe what you want, that is your choice; but my
choice will be to refute unsupportable, false, misleading,
meatarian propaganda for the interest and benefit of the
honest folks here who need valid information.
You will please notice that I have copious
scientifically-credible citations, well over 700, to back up
ALL my claims.
I would therefore require you to refute my citations
with countervailing claims by equally-prestigious,
peer-reviewed scientific literature.
If you can not deal with the biochemistry involved,
please do not waste my time.
I am not interested in shouting matches with idiots, and
and will NOT participate.
Personal insults, vulgarity, name-calling, and
generally oafish behavior will be dealt with immediately by
blocking your posts from my sight, thus banishing you from
my consciousness.

- quote -


- quote -


Can you PLEASE support your claims with real science,
or are
you going to try to overwhelm me with juvenile behavior?

Try to be polite and support your claims with real
science, mindless propaganda and further insults will not be
tolerated.


Laurie
--
Scientifically-credible info on plant-based human diets:
http://ecologos.org/ttdd.html
news:alt.food.vegan.science

On Jun 11, 12:05*pm, Susan <neverm...[at]nomail.com> wrote:
- quote -


Also malnourished kids are dropping like flies. Some vegans have been
charged, and rightly so, with endangering their children.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle4087977.ece

And they presume to tell us how to eat.

x-no-archive: yes

Laurie wrote:

- quote -



If we weren't supposed to eat animals, they wouldn't be made of meat.

And vegans get all those pesky cancers, ovarian, breast, prostate...
along with B12 deficiencies, which may explain their inability to think
clearly.

Susan

TC wrote:
- quote -

http://www.ecologos.org/anxiety.htm
http://ecologos.org/keto.htm
http://www.all-creatures.org/mfz/health-atkins-mg.html
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...ins_bankruptcy
http://ecologos.org/ttdd.html#meat

Laurie
--
Scientifically-credible info on plant-based human diets:
http://ecologos.org/ttdd.html
news:alt.food.vegan.science

On Jun 6, 5:03 am, Bruce <parkerbruc...[at]gmail.com> wrote:
- quote -

Yes it does. And it works long term if you stick to it, which is a lot
easier to do than any other diet. Just stick with the best quality
whole foods and stay away from processed crap like even Atkins sold,
like the atkins bars.Those bars are still just a bunch of processed
crap. Eat real food, it is naturally low carb and so tasty. Just think
BBQ!

x-no-archive: yes

John Hasenkam wrote:
- quote -


No, it doesn't.

First of all, Atkins is high fat, not any higher protein than a standard
diet.

Second, long term risks come from higher glucose and insulin levels,
high triglycerides and low HDL. Low carb diets raise HDL and drop TGLs
like a rock, a pattern that's a marker for large, fluffy, undamaging
LDL, no matter how high it is.

Lower glucose and HbA1c are associated with longevity and health.
Atkins and other low carb diets achieve both.

Fat and protein are the only essential macronutrients in human health;
we have no dietary requirement for carbs at all, though some are good
for us when available.

Susan

It does work remarkably well for some people, both in losing weight and
lowering lipids. I think it can act as a good short term measure(6-12
months) but over the long term a high fat high protein diet just carries too
many risks.

John.
"Bruce" <parkerbruce50[at]gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f5c4a090-d545-48b5-b474-95bee864ff7f[at]d19g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
- quote -

x-no-archive: yes

Bruce wrote:
- quote -


Any diet that lowers fat storage hormones (insulin, cortisol) and
improves lean body mass retention is.

Susan

Is Atkins diet is useful in reducing fat?