Re: This is a good article if you have hang ups either way.

I actually expected a better response than that. I expected you to say that just because an article is published and available through the National Institutes of Health, doesn't necessarily mean that it's endorsed or supported by the NIH. There was an article written by Fuhrman that was also in the same library, and you used the fact that it was in the library to tell people that the NIH published the article that referenced "Toxic Hunger", to make it seem more factual. You led people to believe that "Toxic Hunger" was a real condition because the NIH "published" the article, which was not true.

"Some interesting news is that the Medicine National Institutes of Health library has publish a preliminary results study of Dr. Fuhrman's theory and it does mention "toxic hunger""

Just because someone publishes an article and it lands in the NIH library, does not make it fact. Instead of stating that about my NIH article reference, you took the tact of focusing on the word "may" in the article which I presented, to make it seem uncertain. The truth is that very few scientific studies will ever say that something is definitive. It's really because the scientific community knows better. I've see you use the term "with 100% certainty" and "most people" and "all symptoms" and "all paleo gurus are chubby" as though all of your opinions were definitive and indisputible fact, which everyone with any intelligence knows is not possible.    

Your "Toxic Hunger" article by Fuhrman which you infer is factual, is no different in certainty than the article which I referenced on Adrenal Fatigue.

"It appears that a high nutrient density diet, after an initial phase of adjustment during which a person experiences "toxic hunger" due to withdrawal from pro-inflammatory foods, can result in a sustainable eating pattern that leads to weight loss and improved health. A high nutrient density diet provides benefits for long-term health as well as weight loss. Because our findings have important implications in the global effort to control rates of obesity and related chronic diseases, further studies are needed to confirm these preliminary results."

"We must acknowledge the limitations of this study, including the fact that this was a retrospective, non-controlled study. The instrument we used has not been validated on large or diverse populations, although we did establish preliminary internal consistency and content validity. We recognize that participants were self-selected and may have been biased in their responses by exposure to the information on the website and resources to which they all subscribed. There are discussions of "toxic hunger" versus "true hunger" in the written and web-based materials that participants had access to."

Note that even Fuhrman uses toxic hunger parenthetically.

If you want to attack on my literacy then I'll pick on Fuhrmans mastery 9or lack thereof, of the English language. The phrase "had access to." is not proper English for the end of a sentence. A sentence should never end with a preposition. Proper English, especially for a PhD should be "material to which participants had access.". For these forums, grammatical errors should be tolerated, i.e. you should not focus on people's literary skills, but for articles written by PhD's for the intent of being reviewed by peers, it's damaging to the author's credibility. 

Given my alleged illiteracy, I couldn't possibly let that one go.

This line in Fuhrman's report is laughable:

"It will be important to see if this dramatic shift in hunger perception would be found in populations not exposed to "leading" messages in future studies."

With regard to your examples about adrenals a the speed at which they move, I was not inclined to fall into that trap. Without going back to look at the exact examples, I believe you presented two options whereby Adrenals are moving at speeds in units of miles per hour (mph). Under normal circumstances I may have selected one or both options, however, your debate style history forced me to sellect neither option. This is because I would have opened myself up to another potential "lol", if you were to say that the adrenals aren't actually moving, therefore they cannot travel 80 mph unless your body is moving at 80 mph. So the reference to adrenals moving at speeds in units of mph was not applicable.

I don't have time to post links to definitions for the words in "stress on the Adrenals". if you're struggling with the word "stress", or the word "on" or the word "the", look them up, because all I will do is give you a link the the dictionary definitions. If you're struggling with "Adrenals", rerplace it with "Adrenal Glands" before looking it up, because I intended "Adrenals" to mean "Adrenal Glands". you should be able to find that as well.