I submit that there is a difference between plants created via selective breeding and cross pollination - as could have occured in nature - and those which man has created via trans species genetic transplanted material, artificial gene manipulation and and other unnaturally created plant and animal forms. The recent discussion is about what we have or not adapted to in diet, not what genes have been spliced in to what. What my ancestors ate a thousand years ago and what was around a thousand years ago may have little resemblance to today, but is has everything to to with what I might be able to adapt to eat today. I probably eat healthier than 90% of the folks around, and I could eat a lot healthier still. I do try to avoid unhealthy foods and GMO items. Such as soy. And again NOT ALL SOY IS GMO!!! You really have comprehension issues when it comes to these simple facts. And I have asked several times what you do eat. Let's see how many toxins or other potential dangers I can find in what you are eating. Should be quite eye opening. |
And AGAIN, since 91% of soy products contain GMO soy, when you talk about soy you are talking about GMO soy over 90% of the time.
What do I eat? Do you want an entire month's menu or what?
As much as possible and depending on the season I try to eat such items as:
Do I always stick to the list? No, I stay with the above items a lot, but I do fudge sometimes and have a cheeseburger and tater tots on occasion or a occasional pizza a couple of times a month or a Coke once a week or so, and I have a sweet tooth that is always nagging away. And yes, I still eat some canned goods and other items from the grocers - such as Uncle Ben's Long Grain & Wild Rice (it goes so well with steamed asparagus and baked salmon or other fish with lemon, butter and garlic). But as time goes by and finances allow, I am slowly replacing items from the regular grocers with healthier items from specialty stores and suppliers.
And AGAIN, since 91% of soy products contain GMO soy, when you talk about soy you are talking about GMO soy over 90% of the time.
According to you. Other sources say differently:
http://www.ehow.com/facts_6144599_gmo-soy-products_.html
"It's estimated that 62 percent to 89 percent of all soy crops in the United States are from GMO stock."
And not all the soy goes to human food use but rather animal feed. In addition the 62-89% is what is grown in the US, and does not include imported soy products. Funny how you overlook these obvious facts.
Read more: What Is GMO in Soy Products? | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/facts_6144599_gmo-soy-products_.html#ixzz11Ny04xCt
Read my last statement.
What do I eat? Do you want an entire month's menu or what?
As much as possible and depending on the season I try to eat such items as:
Dang, you better rethink your diet. According to Mercola's claims alone you should be dead already from such as crappy diet full of more toxins than soy!!!!!
Do I always stick to the list? No, I stay with the above items a lot, but I do fudge sometimes and have a cheeseburger and tater tots on occasion or a occasional pizza a couple of times a month or a Coke once a week or so, and I have a sweet tooth that is always nagging away.
With all the toxins in your regular diet according to Mercola your cheeseburger, pizza and Coke are probably safer.
And yes, I still eat some canned goods and other items from the grocers -
You mean the cans providing all that BPA, which is a lot more dangerous than soy?
such as Uncle Ben's Long Grain & Wild Rice (it goes so well with steamed asparagus and baked salmon or other fish with lemon, butter and garlic).
Heavy, metals, protease inhibitors, purines, phytoestrogens, hormones........ Are you sure you want to consume all those toxins?
But as time goes by and finances allow, I am slowly replacing items from the regular grocers with healthier items from specialty stores and suppliers.
According to your claims and Mercola's claims you would have to be replacing your food choices with sterilized sand to make a healthier diet. So again why are you SO paranoid about soy when you are consuming massive amounts of the same things that Mercola is claiming are antinutrients and toxins found in soy in your regular diet as well as others not found in soy? Aren't you paranoid about all those toxins in your daily diet?
You certainly wasted a lot of time on that post. I hate to waste yet more of my time, and I know full well that you won't stop rebutting and justifying no matter what (look at what has happened with this thread, exactly as I warned might happen early on). But here goes in part:
First of all, throw out most of what you warn about beef, chicken, eggs and goats milk. I get all of those from a local family owned and operated organic farm where free range, cage free, no hormones, etc. applies. You should take a look:
I buy directly at the farm itself, which is about 15 miles from me, and can vouch that it operates and looks exactly as it is portrayed on the website.
Second of all, you mistakenly protray me as a Mercola disciple, when the fact is that I have never taken everything Mercola says as gospel. Though I often find myself in agreement with him, I also disagree at times and have posted as much here on CureZone as well as on his own forum. You can continue to portray me as a Mercola-eyte as you wish, but it is not an accurate protrayal.
Deepwater fish contain the least heavy metals. Heavy metals are pretty much unavoidable from all kinds of sources, including plants. Trace amounts of those metals are actually beneficial - they are part of the natural nutrional package the earth has provided and that we have adapted to over the eons. Excess heavy metals are eliminated with parsley, cilantro, spirulina and apple pectin - all of which I consume regularly.
Perhaps I should have been clearer about the organic mayonaisse. I meant no soy, no canola, and no corn oil - all of which I avoid as much as possible due to high GM content.
Exactly how much soy is imported to the US? While some imported products contain soy, we are a soy exporter in the first place and in the second place a very large amount of soy exported from other countries is GMO soy, and it is getting worse. One large example is in South America, where huge amounts of rainforest are being cleared each year for the planting of GMO soy.
Yes, estimates of GMO soy content vary - but virtually ALL agree that the large majority of soy in the US is GMO. The source you quoted said estimates range up to 89%. How is that significantly different than the 91% figure I quoted? Regarding your previous post(s) where you stated that much of the GMO soy goes to cattle feed - how does that make GMO soy safer? Do not those GMO soy fed cattle produce beef and milk which goes on to consumers? I wouldn't call arsenic safe if it were included in cow feed and then passed on to humans.
Rebut as you please, but it is long past the time that this huge thread should have been moved to a debate forum instead of hijacking support forums and I once again will soon move on to things and places where I can make better use of my time.
You certainly wasted a lot of time on that post. I hate to waste yet more of my time, and I know full well that you won't stop rebutting and justifying no matter what (look at what has happened with this thread, exactly as I warned might happen early on). But here goes in part:
First of all, throw out most of what you warn about beef, chicken, eggs and goats milk. I get all of those from a local family owned and operated organic farm where free range, cage free, no hormones, etc. applies.
BONK!!! Wrong again!!!!! If you read closer you would have found that I mentioned generated by the animals, not added. Yes, these products contain naturally occurring hormones that are hundreds of times more powerful than the phytoestrogens that you and Mercola are so worried about.
And other toxins such as arachidonic acid, uric acid and ammonia are also NATURALLY found in the meats and more toxic uric acid is generated by the breakdown of all of these. See according to your own evidence you are poisoning yourself. This is why you should learn the real facts before posting. It would save a lot of time for both of us and you would not spend so much time embarrassing yourself.
Second of all, you mistakenly protray me as a Mercola disciple, when the fact is that I have never taken everything Mercola says as gospel.
Yes you have, his anti-soy propaganda. Even after being thoroughly debunked you still take it as the gospel. What I find the most fascinating though is watching you bash soy because of the so-called "toxins" in it, yet your diet is loaded with these same so-called "toxins". So you are contradicting your own beliefs.
Deepwater fish contain the least heavy metals.
Not necessarily true, but that is a whole other topic to educate you on.
Heavy metals are pretty much unavoidable from all kinds of sources, including plants.
Still there are toxins, yet toxins removed from the phytic acid in soy. If there were traces of heavy metals in soy you and Mercola I am sure would be all over it with more bashing claims.
Trace amounts of those metals are actually beneficial - they are part of the natural nutrional package the earth has provided and that we have adapted to over the eons.
How are trace levels of mercury beneficial? Thallium? Uranium?.......
Excess heavy metals are eliminated with parsley,
Parsley? Oh no, loaded with those toxic phytoestrogens, and also a rich source of toxic coumarins!!!!!
cilantro,
Same properties as that toxic parsley (Note that I am being sarcastic about the toxicity based on Mercola's paranoid claims that you like to follow).
spirulina
I have never seen any evidence that spirulina chelates heavy metals. Chlorella does that. But spirulina raises levels of uric acid, which Mercola claims is dangerous.
and apple pectin - all of which I consume regularly.
While some imported products contain soy, we are a soy exporter in the first place and in the second place a very large amount of soy exported from other countries is GMO soy, and it is getting worse.
We also export cars, and we import cars. We export oil and we import oil. We export wheat and lumber and we import wheat and lumber. It is all part of trade agreements. Do you want me to explain this simple concept to you as well?
Yes, estimates of GMO soy content vary - but virtually ALL agree that the large majority of soy in the US is GMO. The source you quoted said estimates range up to 89%. How is that significantly different than the 91% figure I quoted?
LOL!!! Of course you focused on the upper estimate because it fits your agenda better. And again a lot of that is fed to animals, and is not used in human consumption.
And most imports come from Argentina and Brazil, which are not using GMO soy:
http://www.isaaa.org/kc/cropbiotechupdate/article/default.asp?ID=283
Most US grown soy is being exported to China.
Regarding your previous post(s) where you stated that much of the GMO soy goes to cattle feed - how does that make GMO soy safer? Do not those GMO soy fed cattle produce beef and milk which goes on to consumers?
Does it make it unsafe? You are basing nearly all of your arguments on ASSUMPTIONS, not proven facts. How do you know that these genes are not destroyed by the animal's immune system being foreign, or are broken down in the digestion process. Again you are just assuming that it will be a danger. And as I said previously I am not a fan of GMO either, but I can think of a number of things in our food supply that I would worry about more than GMO.
I wouldn't call arsenic safe if it were included in cow feed and then passed on to humans.
Yet apples have arsenic and you are consuming apple products. Again you should research the facts before posting so you stop wasting so much time and making yourself look foolish. Even the spirulina you ingest contains arsenic, which it has a high affinity for, as well as other heavy metals and as I pointed out earlier also elevates uric acid that Mercola claims is toxic:
http://healthlibrary.epnet.com/GetContent.aspx?token=e0498803-7f62-4563-8d47-...
"In addition, when spirulina is grown with the use of fermented animal waste fertilizers, contamination with dangerous bacteria could occur.28,32 There are also concerns that spirulina might concentrate radioactive ions found in its environment.29 Probably of most concern is spirulina's ability to absorb and concentrate heavy metals such as lead and mercury if they are present in its environment. One study of spirulina samples grown in a number of locations found them to contain an unacceptably high content of these toxic metals.33 However, a second study on this topic claims that the first used an unreliable method of analyzing heavy metal content,34 and concludes that a person would have to eat more than 77 g daily of the most heavily contaminated spirulina to reach unsafe mercury and lead consumption levels.
These researchers, however, go on to suggest that it is not prudent to eat more than 50 g of spirulina daily. The reason they give is that the plant contains a high concentration of nucleic acids, substances related to DNA. When these are metabolized, they create uric acid, which could cause
gout or kidney stones. This is of special concern to those who have already had uric acid stones or attacks of gout."
OK, you induced me into one more post (which I think is much of your game anyway).
Soy dangers thoroughly debunked you say? By who - you and the soy industry you seem to be so closely in contact with? From one of your earlier posts:
"The bean has a beany flavor, which is something the industry has been working on. "
Not something I would expect anyone to know unless they followed, or perhaps were furnished, news from the soy industry.
Educating me? Fortunately, I have free will and get to chose who I am educated by and what I do or do not accept as valid education. That includes rejecting what I do not agree with when it comes to Mercola and it certainly includes you when it comes to your defending soy by every stretch possible, such as comparing it with natural fruits and vegetables or cocoa and tapioca, or your opinion that the vast majority of cancers are caused by viruses. If you have something valid to say in my opinion, and I grant that you have on several occasions, then I am glad to be educated. Not so though with other things, such as cancer causes and soy.
As I stated early on, and set you totally off in the process, I still find your rabid support of soy to be incongruous for someone who supposedly supports natural healing. Yes, I know, you corrected me by saying that, rather than favoring natural healing, you "supported what works". However, you call yourself a herbalist and produce videos by "Ask the Herbalist". To me, the term "herbalist" has historically meant someone who supports natural healing. Then again, I note that you are described elsewhere on the internet as actually being "a formulating chemist that specializes in herbs."
Not quite the same as a true "herbalist", or at least a traditional herbalist, is it? Noveau herbalist perhaps? Lots of chemists support soy. Then again, lots of chemists have been siding with BP on the Gulf spill too, though I suspect money and industry connections have a lot to do with such support. Chemists also tell us that crushed rocks and coal tar derivatives are the same as plant derived minerals and natural whole food vitamins and any number of other things. To them, chemistry in the lab is no different than chemistry in nature. Not many true herbalists say such things and the vast majority of the ones I know are decidedly against soy too.
OK, you induced me into one more post (which I think is much of your game anyway).
How did I know that your obsession with insults would have you coming back to post more?
Soy dangers thoroughly debunked you say? By who - you and the soy industry you seem to be so closely in contact with? From one of your earlier posts:
"The bean has a beany flavor, which is something the industry has been working on. "
Not something I would expect anyone to know unless they followed, or perhaps were furnished, news from the soy industry.
ROTFLMAO!!!! Paranoia runneth amuck!!!!!
I am in the herb industry DQ, and I get all the trade herb/supplement trade journals, which is where I read about this problem. Gee, I also know that hydrogen peroxide is used in rocket fuel so based your reasoning this must mean I am also associated with NASA.
The rest of your dribbling nonsense post is almost not worth responding to except for this one comment:
Then again, I note that you are described elsewhere on the internet as actually being "a formulating chemist that specializes in herbs."
I have no idea where you found this since I have never seen it, nor did I ever approve of that statement. I do find it interesting though that you have been scouring the Internet so intensely to dig up trash on me. Either I am running for office or you are on the verge of being a cyberstalker.
"Hveragerthi is the name James Sloane goes by at www.curezone.com James is a formulating chemist that specializes in herbs. You can read about him at www.mountainmistbotanicals.com"
http://www.quitsmokingjournals.com/forum/display_topic_threads.asp?mode=new&a...
About James Sloane, our herbal formulator:
James’ approach to health challenges is dramatically different from most formulators – he takes into account the chemistry, anatomy and physiological factors, he formulates his line to address these factors and to produce a desired result.
http://www.mountainmistbotanicals.com/
So yes, you were so described and also described as a herbal formulator who takes chemistry into account.
Cyberstalker? Isn't that the claim you made when you were banned at Indiadivine.org five years ago after another "debate" involving your defense of soy?
"Oh, by the way, our mystery person is a man and, in case you don't already know, his name is James Sloane.
"Now he is emailing me off list, and perhaps others as well. I haven't responded though. For someone who is so concerned about cyberstalkers being after him, he is concerning me a bit now."
http://www.indiadivine.org/audarya/ayurveda-health-wellbeing/1040629-hverager...
Now, I realize that my friend Doc Shillington can be a bit tetchy at times, but given how you have posted and behaved in this thread and in others, I have to wonder if history is not repeating itself?
Insofar as my checking up on you, your continual defense of soy made me wonder if perhaps there was a connection out there somewhere - because it otherwise makes no sense to me. I found none. Looks like to me that you have some good herbal combos. Now, if only you would also have good behavior and stop playing the victim and turning every disagreement into an imagined personal attack we would all be better off.
Seriously H. Learn to walk away from disagreement and operate above the fray. You are your own worst enemy here and the response you got from your post on the WM forum (quickly moved by the WM to the WM debate and Public Trash Can forums) and subsequent posts should provide you plenty of evidence of that. You have too much positive to contribute here to let your penchant for attacking at the drop of a hat and the name calling and such to erode your credibility as it is surely doing. I sincerely hope you figure that out sooner than later.
"Hveragerthi is the name James Sloane goes by at www.curezone.com James is a formulating chemist that specializes in herbs. You can read about him at www.mountainmistbotanicals.com"
http://www.quitsmokingjournals.com/forum/display_topic_threads.asp?mode=new&a...
About James Sloane, our herbal formulator:
James’ approach to health challenges is dramatically different from most formulators – he takes into account the chemistry, anatomy and physiological factors, he formulates his line to address these factors and to produce a desired result.
http://www.mountainmistbotanicals.com/
So yes, you were so described and also described as a herbal formulator who takes chemistry into account.
That is not the same as your claim "Then again, I note that you are described elsewhere on the internet as actually being "a formulating chemist that specializes in herbs."
So exactly where does it say I am a "formulating chemist that specializes in herbs"? Because I took in to account the design of my model rockets when building them did this make me a rocket scientist?
As for your other comment:
"Not quite the same as a true "herbalist", or at least a traditional herbalist, is it?"
The same applies to your potentially dangerous and unproven oleander tea. Do you alter its natural structure to make the tea? Of course. Do you have to take in to consideration the chemistry of the preparation and supposed effects of the plant? Of course. So you are guilty of exactly what you are trying to slam me for.
Cyberstalker? Isn't that the claim you made when you were banned at Indiadivine.org five years ago after another "debate" involving your defense of soy?
"Oh, by the way, our mystery person is a man and, in case you don't already know, his name is James Sloane.
"Now he is emailing me off list, and perhaps others as well. I haven't responded though. For someone who is so concerned about cyberstalkers being after him, he is concerning me a bit now."
http://www.indiadivine.org/audarya/ayurveda-health-wellbeing/1040629-hverager...
Yep, just like a real cyberstalker you are going above and beyond to dig up dirt on me since you cannot respond with facts.
Now, I realize that my friend Doc Shillington can be a bit tetchy at times, but given how you have posted and behaved in this thread and in others, I have to wonder if history is not repeating itself?
ROTFLMAO!!! This is why you should stick to what you REALLY know and not hearsay. But since you brought the nutcase up here is what really happened. On his board Shillington CLEARLY stated that he welcomed debate. Of course he could not tell the truth either. As soon as he questioned over some of his false claims about soy he got his panties all up in a bunch. So I presented the proof that his claims were wrong and he immediately banned me for it.
As far as the bogus claims that I was e-mailing people from the forum this was totally misleading. I RESPONDED to a few posters questions after they e-mailed me. I did not send any unsolicited e-mails as claimed. In fact once I was banned I DID NOT have any access to anyone's e-mail addresses from the board since you could only contact them directly through the board. So again, the only way I was able to contact these posters were in response to their e-mails to me. But hey, why present facts when you can make up stuff that you really know nothing about to trash me some more?
Funny how you claim to be friends with Shillington though and you tow are so much alike!!! Neither of you can stand to be proven wrong and make things up to fit your needs including spreading rumors against those who oppose you.
Insofar as my checking up on you, your continual defense of soy made me wonder if perhaps there was a connection out there somewhere - because it otherwise makes no sense to me.
It is simple. I am about the real facts, not made up scare tactic propaganda that has already been disproven over and over and over.....
I found none. Looks like to me that you have some good herbal combos. Now, if only you would also have good behavior and stop playing the victim and turning every disagreement into an imagined personal attack we would all be better off.
LOL!!! That is referred to in medicine as "PROJECTION"!!!
Seriously H. Learn to walk away from disagreement and operate above the fray. You are your own worst enemy here and the response you got from your post on the WM forum (quickly moved by the WM to the WM debate and Public Trash Can forums) and subsequent posts should provide you plenty of evidence of that. You have too much positive to contribute here to let your penchant for attacking at the drop of a hat and the name calling and such to erode your credibility as it is surely doing. I sincerely hope you figure that out sooner than later.
More projection. But I have looked through some of your older posts and see I am not the only victim you have attacked then blamed. You have quite a history of doing this.
For instance I love how you keep bringing up the WM's actions in what you claim is against me without telling people about how you were warned by the WM about stopping your attacks or the fact that some of the threads ogt moved because of the arguments and attacks started by you. So why do you insist on misleading people time and time again?
What is up with this 6 month later reply? Are you trying to start more crap or did you just realize that there was a thread in a forum you have yet to be banned from where you didn't get the last word in?
Whatever your reason, I don't have the time or inclination for such nonsense, so my one and only response is . . .
Whatever you say, Hv.
...people do not "adjust" to dead, devitalized, processed foods very well...
http://www.soilandhealth.org/02/0203cat/020305ppnf/PPNFpartII.html
What does this have to do with the topic? Because people of different cultures start getting cavities when they start eating sugary foods has nothing to do with genetic adaptation that is being claimed. Cavities result from the effects of bacteria in the mouth on sugars generating acids.
It really makes me wonder, IC, look at the sponsors of this organization. BTW, they're aligned with the site I posted above, as are many, many others.
http://www.aacr.org/home/about-us/aacr-foundation/corporateinstitutional-part...
|
|
Current Sustaining Members:
|
|