Processed food IS killing us, pt 2. by Wishimay

Really has me wondering if I have a problem with phosphates, not sulfites, because the nuts and eggs are on this list, and with my extreme family history of cancer....

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, April 13, 2015 4:03 PM

JONGSSTRAW

Another day, another bitch, moan, and groan fest from the fat miserable self-absorbed psycho drama princess Wishimaydie.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, April 13, 2015 4:09 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Well ... your body needs phosphate. It's part of the basic currency of chemical cell energy, used to build tissue, move, generate heat, run your immune system etc.

The basic energy molecule is ATP which stands for adenosine triphosphate.

As your body releases energy from food it adds it to ADP - adenosine diphosphate - by adding an extra phosphate on and creating the high-energy ATP. Then the ATP is carried to wherever energy is needed. As that one phosphate comes off the ATP the energy is released and transferred to where it's needed - joining amino acids to make proteins; releasing the actin-myosin bond, moving actin and myosin filaments and reattaching them causing movement; breaking down in water to create heat etc.

Without phosphate you are cold, motionless, stiff, rotting - dead.

That's not to say that phosphate added to food isn't a problem. Life requires a balance of basic ingredients within a working range. When you go outside of that range your physiology works to compensate for that. But as you drive your metabolism towards extremes, you can create secondary problems that over time end up as disease - high blood pressure, diabetes, coronary artery disease, cancer etc.

But, given the necessity of a ubiquitous presence of phosphate throughout every cell in the body, I don't think that the /phosphate added to food - prostate cancer/ link is a direct one.

SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, April 13, 2015 4:24 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Another day, another bitch

Shh, the adults are talking Jongsie, why don't you go play in the street like a good... whatever you are...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, April 13, 2015 4:38 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

I just think it's funny that Jongsie is so thoroughly soused so early. Things must be going well. Not.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, April 13, 2015 4:49 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:

But, given the necessity of a ubiquitous presence of phosphate throughout every cell in the body, I don't think that the /phosphate added to food - prostate cancer/ link is a direct one.

-Yes, but like sulfites (which are needed for connective tissue repair) both have been added to foods in massive amounts and who would know if they are overdosing on this stuff daily? You can overdose on water, salt, iron, ect and it can be fatal, so I'm sure overdosing on sulfites and phosphates can have just as serious complications.

PS I think the article was mainly referring to people with fast growing cancers, not everyone in general...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, April 13, 2015 4:52 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
thoroughly soused so early.

Is THAT why it does that??? Well, makes more sense then. I don't think he/she came down from last nights' bender if that's the case...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, April 13, 2015 5:40 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Oh I agree that there's such a thing as too much of anything. Even too much water can be fatal in the short-term. Food additives in general aren't short-term toxins at the concentrations they're used though. It'd be hard to sell your pastrami if large numbers of people were dying after a sandwich. No, the additives work insidiously over the long-term.

I did a quick search on the body's active phosphate balancing, or phosphate homeostasis. There's a lot that isn't known specifically about the role of the gut for example. But when it comes to dumping excess, that's the job of the kidneys. And phosphate is ubiquitous in food - it would sort of have to be. Everything we eat was alive once, and has its own load of phosphate from ATP, ADP, and other sources. So the body is pretty adept at getting rid of excess, because that's the normal state of things. But having a large excess isn't something that I think would be healthy over the long-term, for the reasons I mentioned earlier.

All that assumes your phosphate physiology is normal. If it's not, then that's a whole different topic.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, April 13, 2015 6:35 PM

JONGSSTRAW

Another day, another bitch, moan, and groan fest from the fat miserable self-absorbed psycho drama princess Wishimaydie.

Fuck you and your little dog Kiko too.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, April 13, 2015 6:41 PM

WHOZIT

I like food that's been fried in fat.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, April 13, 2015 7:53 PM

Not mentioned above, the name of the protein is Runx2. It is not listed on food labeling, but found through testing.

The sidebar article also mentions the 98% accuracy in dogs smelling whether a person has cancer or not - excellent detection system.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, April 13, 2015 9:26 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

The sidebar article also mentions the 98% accuracy in dogs smelling whether a person has cancer or not - excellent detection system.

I still think that has to do with acidity levels...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, April 13, 2015 9:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by whozit:
I like food that's been fried in fat.

Well, yer brainz aready been done fried, so mebbe dat's whys it seems familliars-like?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 14, 2015 9:02 AM

The only one that would really bug me, believe it or not- is PEAS.
Love the damn things. I take a bag of frozen peas and a couple pats of butter and sea salt and we chow down. One of my favorite foods, really...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 14, 2015 2:14 PM

I went to the dentist today to get a filling re-cast and I asked if the stuff he usually uses has sulfites in it (it's always taken ten minutes to work and I never get totally numb, and then am nauseous for HOURS afterward)

and he went and got the ingredient sheet off his desk.. SURE ENOUGH..
Sodium metabisulfite!

So he went and got another one he has called articaine, and it was like a dental miracle happened!

I was totally numb within seconds, didn't feel a thing, and it already wearing off! I can't believe the difference!!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 14, 2015 8:37 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wishimay:
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
The sidebar article also mentions the 98% accuracy in dogs smelling whether a person has cancer or not - excellent detection system.

I still think that has to do with acidity levels...

98% accurate if the person HAS cancer.
98% accurate if the person DOES NOT have cancer.
Regardless of HOW, or the mechanism, that is some seriously useful evaluation, and practically instantaneous.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 14, 2015 8:42 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wishimay:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3037305/Prostate-cancer-brea
kthrough-test-flags-aggressive-form-disease.html

The new breakthrough centers on the discovery of a protein which, when it combines naturally with phosphates in the body, seemed to activate genes that speed up the growth of tumours.

Soft drinks, soda drinks, especially cola or coke and fizzy lemonade
Cordials/fruit syrup beverages
Chocolate, lollies, sweets, candy, and anything else with a high citric acid and sugar content
Ice-cream
Skim milk powder (often added to processed foods)

Mayonnaise

Baking powder and self-raising flour often contains phosphate aerator

Egg yolks
Milk
Nuts
Wheat germ
Soybeans and their by-products
Peas
Beans
Lentils
Corn
Mushrooms
Oats
Cocoa beans (chocolate)
Sweet breads - liver, brains, kidneys

Salty:
Biscuits, cookies, cakes from the supermarket
Tomato ketchup
Fish fingers
Processed cheese, especially soft cheese spread
Frozen pizzas
Hot dogs
Processed meats
Avoid all foods that list as an ingredient mineral salts, emulsifiers and lecithin.

Looks like half of that list is salt.
Mushrooms seens unusual - isn't there some benefits to eating shrooms?
Liver bread? Brain bread? Kidney bread?
And remember "processed meats" includes almost everything at a deli or sub sandwich shop. Unless it is fresh meat (you killed it yourself or saw it killed) or you got it frozen, it is a known carcinogen. Like chicken or turkey, like on a sandwich - just keep buying them frozen, and cooking them at home, cutting them up for your food.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 14, 2015 10:54 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Hey there Wish

Some local anesthetics have vaso-constrictors in them. They keep the cardiovascular system from washing the anesthetic away, and so prolong its effect. I wonder if they also keep the anesthetic from spreading through the tissue to reach the place where they work - at the nerve tract.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, April 15, 2015 12:08 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:

I wonder if they also keep the anesthetic from spreading through the tissue to reach the place where they work - at the nerve tract.

I just looked up the ingredients and the new one also contains sulfites, so I dunno. I don't know what he usually uses, so I can't compare amounts.
All I know is the new stuff works about a 1000 times better on me...

It could have a different vaso constrictor in it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, April 15, 2015 12:28 AM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Or none. I've mentioned to my several dentists over the years that I do badly with local anesthetics - pounding racing heart and anxiety ... apparently some mixes use adrenaline as a vasoconstrictor. When they started using injections without the added adrenaline, my 'problem' with getting injections went away.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 18, 2015 4:20 PM

Noticed that whacko genetic mutation supporters mostly from CA are whining to Columbia (where none of them are from) that they should not allow Doctor Oz to be on faculty or Board. They complaining that he is not supporting their enthusiastic program for ingesting GMOs nationwide.

https://ca.shine.yahoo.com/group-of-doctors-asks-columbia-university-t
o-fire-dr--oz-125444163.html

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 18, 2015 5:35 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

The letter tries - and imo, fails - to make a 'case' against Oz. "As described here and here, as well as in other publications, Dr. Oz has repeatedly shown disdain for science and for evidence-based medicine, as well as baseless and relentless opposition to the genetic engineering of food crops. Worst of all, he has manifested an egregious lack of integrity by promoting quack treatments and cures in the interest of personal financial gain."

AFAIK Oz has no financial gain from anything he has on his show. But to try and bolster its claims, the letter includes two hot links.

One link provides one specific example regarding arsenic in apple juice. Its criticisms are well-founded. Because, while Dr Oz is not a charlatan, he's no chemist either. The FDA's criticisms center around two things:

http://www.medpagetoday.com/PrimaryCare/DietNutrition/28528

FDA Slams 'Dr. Oz' for Apple Juice Report

1) ... Oz's testing methods ... provided a level of total arsenic in the juices. The results do not provide a breakdown of the levels of the two forms of arsenic -- organic and inorganic. ... The organic form of arsenic is "essentially harmless," according to the FDA. The inorganic form can cause problems at high levels or with a long period of exposure.

2) Also ... the FDA had performed its own testing on samples of apple juice from the same lot that yielded the highest level of arsenic in Dr. Oz's investigation. All of the results ranged from 2 ppb to 6 ppb, well under the 36 ppb that the lab Dr Oz used got. In ALL labs I personally know about, whenever there's a concerning result, the laboratory goes through extra steps to validate the result. That's not mentioned here, so I suspect that didn't happen. And generally, whenever two different labs get two different results, they usually get together and show each other the original procedural notes and instrumental results to resolve what happened. That also doesn't look like it happened here.

The other link is to an article from Slate, one of whose authors is the same Henry I. Miller of the Hoover Inst. and author and primary signatory of the letter - who cites --- himself. Aside from the fact that this is starting to look like a focused effort by a pro-business 'policy' wonk to discredit Oz; his own article that he cites in support of himself is on very shaky ground from beginning to end.

It uses phrases like the proposed commercialization of this new variety was met with unconscionable, irresponsible, and lengthy regulatory delays and egregiously misleading arguments like ... nationwide polls suggested that up to 80 percent of Americans want labels on foods that contain DNA. It then goes on to ridicule this argument Like many antagonists of genetic engineering, Honeycutt attempted to demonize glyphosate ....

WAIT. Would that be the same glyphosate WHO has deemed is a 'probable carcinogen'? Why, yes, it would be.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/widely-used-herbicide-linked
-to-cancer/

And, FWIW from the letter I counted 5 signatories from California, including two from the ultra-conservative pro-business Hoover Institution; 1 from Florida, 1 from New York, 1 from New Jersey, 1 from Kansas, and 1 from North Carolina. Only half are from California, which, in normal English, doesn't mean 'mostly' from CA.

regarding two of the signatories, including the author:

Henry I. Miller, M.D.
Robert Wesson Fellow in Scientific Philosophy & Public Policy - Hoover Institution Stanford University, Stanford, CA

Scott W. Atlas, M.D.
David and Joan Traitel Senior Fellow - Hoover Institution Stanford University, Stanford, CA

... what do you have against ultra-conservative pro-business people from the Hoover Institution? I thought they'd be just your style.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 18, 2015 10:32 PM

It has nothing to do with anything, but I can't STAND to watch Dr. Oz speak, his mouth moves like the yip-yop monsters from Sesame St.

And then I get an image of him drooling and incontinent in my head.

Don't ask me why, I dunno.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 18, 2015 10:42 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

I tape him but I watch like this: skip ahead 1 minute enough times to figure out what the topic is; if it's of interest I listen while I do something else like laundry or dishes; if not I keep skipping forward until I either reach an interesting topic, or I get to the end.

He recently had a segment about near death experiences, which, by all accounts, I've had something similar to, twice.* Either that, or they were like what the Indians had when they went on a vision quest. So, what he has on, and what interests me, sometimes coincide.

* I've also had a vision experience that sounds similar to St Paul, and a time where I just knew an unknowable fact. And a time where my right brain told me an answer to a problem in a flash of inspiration, and showed me a vision of the nerve tracts along which it happened, which looked, amazingly, exactly like currently available images of fluorescent tracts people have bioengineered in rodent brains to study learning.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 18, 2015 11:12 PM

I had my tonsils removed when I was six, and I distinctly remember floating above the bed looking at myself.

Brains is funny things.

I've had dozens of really clear deje vu kinda feelings, only I couldn't have done them before I had the feeling, for most of them...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 18, 2015 11:29 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Brains ARE funny things. I think these experiences aren't necessarily what people say they are - a product of the supernatural, for example - but for me they've all been associated with knowing things I 'shouldn't' be able to know. Given that they relate things about the real world that test out true - I wonder about the neurological processes involved. And then, they also relate things about the nature of life, time, and distance which feel profound and just as real as the information about the physical world. And if one type of information tests true, it FEELS like it gives support for the other type of information being true as well.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 19, 2015 2:02 AM

SHINYGOODGUY

Better yet, go eat a ton of processed food..................please, pretty please with sugar on top. STFU

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by Wishimay:
Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Another day, another bitch

Shh, the adults are talking Jongsie, why don't you go play in the street like a good... whatever you are...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 19, 2015 2:40 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Originally posted by Wishimay:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3037305/Prostate-cancer-brea
kthrough-test-flags-aggressive-form-disease.html

The new breakthrough centers on the discovery of a protein which, when it combines naturally with phosphates in the body, seemed to activate genes that speed up the growth of tumours.

The article only talks abut prostate cancer. WISH, I think that maybe prostate cancer isn't your most pressing problem.

And what does this list have to do with cancer?

Quote:
Soft drinks, soda drinks, especially cola or coke and fizzy lemonade
Cordials/fruit syrup beverages
Chocolate, lollies, sweets, candy, and anything else with a high citric acid and sugar content
Ice-cream
Skim milk powder (often added to processed foods)
Biscuits, cookies, cakes from the supermarket
Tomato ketchup
Mayonnaise
Fish fingers
Processed cheese, especially soft cheese spread
Frozen pizzas
Hot dogs
Processed meats
Baking powder and self-raising flour often contains phosphate aerator
Avoid all foods that list as an ingredient mineral salts, emulsifiers and lecithin.
Egg yolks
Milk
Nuts
Wheat germ
Soybeans and their by-products
Peas
Beans
Lentils
Corn
Mushrooms
Oats
Cocoa beans (chocolate)
Sweet breads - liver, brains, kidneys

I look at good nutrition as being close to what we evolved with, because there are some nutritional requirements that you can't get around. And this list reminds of the list that vegans put out. Meat is the ONLY source of B12, and you need B12 to live. So the vegan list is suspect.

I look at this other list and I see two things on it that (between the two of them) are the BEST sources of a vital nutrient. And just like the vegan list, the fact that it crosses off the only two sources of a vital nutrient makes the entire list suspect. BTW- The nutrient is choline, and the two best sources are liver and egg yolks. And I have a hunch that our ancestors ate bird eggs, and never turned down a nice chunk of liver (when they could get it) or bone marrow.

So, what is the purpose of the list? What is it attempting to avoid?

If it's attempting to avoid phosphate, then (as KIKI said) there is phosphate in everything that was once living. Which is pretty much everything that people eat.

I know that some people can't process certain amino acids, others can't tolerate certain minerals. For still yet others, certain types of fat are death. Certain types of fiber appear to give some people IBS. And sugar is prolly bad for almost everyone. But who is this list for, and what is it trying to do?

-----------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 19, 2015 10:08 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The article only talks abut prostate cancer. WISH, I think that maybe prostate cancer isn't your most pressing problem.

Well, for one, there is a history of fast growing tumors in my family. We're up to about a dozen in three generations. And we're talking about the kind of fast growing tumors that get you dead in less than six months. There are a lotta guys that live with prostate cancer for years and years, but the men in my family do not. There has been a LOT of research lately
that shows direct causal links between a father having cancer and the female children, not the male children as you would think. Which I think would relate to the studies in Norway (I think it was) that found that in times of famine a man that is affected can pass on weaker genes to the female children even up to several generations later.

So, yes, I do believe it affects me. Also, I take after my dad. I even have a deeper voice than most women do, so I know his genetics affect non-typical female traits.

The list was showing foods that are high in phosphates that should be avoided if you have a tumor and/or a family history of fast growing tumors.
For those people, phosphates should be avoided as much as possible.

As I always say, there IS NO UNIFORM DIET FOR EVERYONE. YOU have to follow the clues in research and do what you think is best for you.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 19, 2015 10:35 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

WISH, the study was about fast-growing PROSTATE tumors. It's so limited in its application, there is no indication that every (or even many) other tumors over-express this particular protein (runx2, runx3), or that limiting phosphate would slow or prevent growth of (a possibly very small subset of) tumors which over-express runt protein in the first place.

Just doing a quick study on runt and its variants runx2 and runx3, the normal function of runt protein is bone formation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RUNX2

In CERTAIN tumors (breast, prostate, metastasize aggressively to bone)

Quote:
This skeletal transcription factor is aberrantly expressed at high levels in breast and prostate tumors and cells that aggressively metastasize to the bone environment.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17165130

Does this describe your family history: breast cancer, prostate cancer, or cancers which aggressively metastasized to the bone? If not (if you have a family hx of neurofibroma, for example) then runx2 is most likely not at play. Because don't forget, there are OTHER factors which OTHER cancers make use of to grow and metastasize, runt (or runx2, runx3 etc) are not the holy grail of tumor formation or spread.

I understand that you're doing your very best to prevent certain diseases from occurring, or to slow down processes which may already be taking place. However, you're taking one thought in one limited area of research, and making several rather large assumptions (one being that limiting phosphate will limit runx2).

I know that you have unique medical challenges. Perhaps this is "the answer" and maybe you're really on to something here (at least in your case) but, based on what you've said so far, the evidence seems lacking. But I'm willing to think thru your situation with you, if you're willing to share.

Also, I would quibble about the title, since many of the foods on your list are quite natural.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 19, 2015 3:08 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
The letter tries - and imo, fails - to make a 'case' against Oz. "As described here and here, as well as in other publications, Dr. Oz has repeatedly shown disdain for science and for evidence-based medicine, as well as baseless and relentless opposition to the genetic engineering of food crops. Worst of all, he has manifested an egregious lack of integrity by promoting quack treatments and cures in the interest of personal financial gain."

AFAIK Oz has no financial gain from anything he has on his show. But to try and bolster its claims, the letter includes two hot links.

One link provides one specific example regarding arsenic in apple juice. Its criticisms are well-founded. Because, while Dr Oz is not a charlatan, he's no chemist either. The FDA's criticisms center around two things:

http://www.medpagetoday.com/PrimaryCare/DietNutrition/28528

FDA Slams 'Dr. Oz' for Apple Juice Report

1) ... Oz's testing methods ... provided a level of total arsenic in the juices. The results do not provide a breakdown of the levels of the two forms of arsenic -- organic and inorganic. ... The organic form of arsenic is "essentially harmless," according to the FDA. The inorganic form can cause problems at high levels or with a long period of exposure.

2) Also ... the FDA had performed its own testing on samples of apple juice from the same lot that yielded the highest level of arsenic in Dr. Oz's investigation. All of the results ranged from 2 ppb to 6 ppb, well under the 36 ppb that the lab Dr Oz used got. In ALL labs I personally know about, whenever there's a concerning result, the laboratory goes through extra steps to validate the result. That's not mentioned here, so I suspect that didn't happen. And generally, whenever two different labs get two different results, they usually get together and show each other the original procedural notes and instrumental results to resolve what happened. That also doesn't look like it happened here.

The other link is to an article from Slate, one of whose authors is the same Henry I. Miller of the Hoover Inst. and author and primary signatory of the letter - who cites --- himself. Aside from the fact that this is starting to look like a focused effort by a pro-business 'policy' wonk to discredit Oz; his own article that he cites in support of himself is on very shaky ground from beginning to end.

It uses phrases like the proposed commercialization of this new variety was met with unconscionable, irresponsible, and lengthy regulatory delays and egregiously misleading arguments like ... nationwide polls suggested that up to 80 percent of Americans want labels on foods that contain DNA. It then goes on to ridicule this argument Like many antagonists of genetic engineering, Honeycutt attempted to demonize glyphosate ....

WAIT. Would that be the same glyphosate WHO has deemed is a 'probable carcinogen'? Why, yes, it would be.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/widely-used-herbicide-linked
-to-cancer/

And, FWIW from the letter I counted 5 signatories from California, including two from the ultra-conservative pro-business Hoover Institution; 1 from Florida, 1 from New York, 1 from New Jersey, 1 from Kansas, and 1 from North Carolina. Only half are from California, which, in normal English, doesn't mean 'mostly' from CA.

regarding two of the signatories, including the author:

Henry I. Miller, M.D.
Robert Wesson Fellow in Scientific Philosophy & Public Policy - Hoover Institution Stanford University, Stanford, CA

Scott W. Atlas, M.D.
David and Joan Traitel Senior Fellow - Hoover Institution Stanford University, Stanford, CA

... what do you have against ultra-conservative pro-business people from the Hoover Institution? I thought they'd be just your style.

I was hurried and did not count the signatories.
I thought the subject might be of interest to those viewing this thread, and I had not seen it mentioned prior.
If that applies to you as well, you are welcome.
I am not a supporter of Big Pharma, Big Government, Big Corn, Big Injustice, Big Death Sentence, or Big Debt. Those can be supported by the libtards and also the GOP liberals and RINOs.

You would not find me surprised if the same signatories, or other similar lackies had also signed letters supporting Global Warming, and whining about real scientists pointing out the holes of their Global Warming religion.

Junk Science has risen to the top.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 19, 2015 3:58 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wishimay:
I had my tonsils removed when I was six, and I distinctly remember floating above the bed looking at myself.

Brains is funny things.

were you afraid of using more than 10% of your brain? Or were others frightened or jealous or threatened by your abilities?

Quote:

I've had dozens of really clear deje vu kinda feelings, only I couldn't have done them before I had the feeling, for most of them...

Did your OBE and Deja Vu continue into adulthood? Or did somebody find some drugs to stop your ESP? Did you have other forms of Sensory Perception beyond the accepted 5? Other psychic phenomenon?
Have you seen the film Suspect Zero? And the "demonstration" in the bonus features on the DVD?
Have you ever tried to perform Technical Remote Viewing?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 19, 2015 5:21 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Let's get back to your original post, and not the one you now want to pretend you posted:

Noticed that whacko genetic mutation supporters mostly from CA are whining to Columbia (where none of them are from) that they should not allow Doctor Oz to be on faculty or Board. They complaining that he is not supporting their enthusiastic program for ingesting GMOs nationwide.

And now I'll parse your current ass-covering.

I was hurried and did not count the signatories.
But not too hurried to form and express a fallacious opinion.

I thought the subject might be of interest to those viewing this thread, and I had not seen it mentioned prior.
And in addition you just couldn't resist trolling! "whacko genetic mutation supporters mostly from CA" You COULD have simply posted the subject in case it was of interest to those viewing this thread. But you didn't. So, that trolling - that was the main point of your post - wasn't it? C'mon, dish. It's just us girls here.

I am not a supporter of Big Pharma, Big Government, Big Corn, Big Injustice, Big Death Sentence, or Big Debt. Those can be supported by ... the GOP liberals and RINOs.
Because the Hoover Institution is secretly liberal? You post a lot of crap that no one believes just to pretend you aren't wrong, don't you?

You would not find me surprised if the same signatories, or other similar lackies had also signed letters supporting Global Warming, and whining about real scientists pointing out the holes of their Global Warming religion.
Junk Science has risen to the top.
And still MORE unfounded, fact-free opinion!

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 19, 2015 5:36 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Anybody read this blog?

http://www.badscience.net/

An interesting one. Very critical of medical research, particularly how it is treated in the media but not a wacky conspiracy theorist either.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 19, 2015 5:38 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

I am not a supporter of Big Pharma, Big Government, Big Corn, Big Injustice, Big Death Sentence, or Big Debt. Those can be supported by the libtards and also the GOP liberals and RINOs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 19, 2015 10:09 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Does this describe your family history: breast cancer, prostate cancer, or cancers which aggressively metastasized to the bone?

Well, since dad died of aggressive prostate cancer, mom has breast cancer now, and my great grandpa died of a bone cancer... Not to mention brain tumors, ovarian, leukemia, and an oral cancer.... Am I missing any? Who knows what the hell I have. All I know is my people hit sixty and die horribly while each generation gets told again and again "Oh, well, you'll be OK. Treatment is sooo much better now."

Yeah.... riiiiight.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 19, 2015 10:27 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

I don't know what I would do if I had your family history. Though my entire paternal side of the family is on another continent and I know nothing about them, so perhaps I share half that misfortune, and I just don't know about it.

I remember reading years ago that breast cancer and prostate cancer seem to share the same susceptibility, so for example the son of a woman with breast cancer has a greater chance of prostate cancer, the daughter of a man with prostate cancer has a greater chance of having breast cancer. Are you able to get yourself genetically tested for the brca1 and brca2 genes? it might give you a definitives heads-up. Those mutations also seem to increase the odds of ovarian cancer.
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/causes-prevention/genetics/brca-fac
t-sheet

Redheads have a far greater chance of melanoma, even without damaging sun exposure. BOTH redheads I know personally who got a lot of exposure in their youth here in So Cal developed multiple melanomas by the age of 45 - but they were all caught early and both people have been cancer free for over 15 years since.

Anyway - I'm not trying to be dismissive, but I need to attend to something now. I hope to get back to this topic specifically about leukemia susceptibility later.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 19, 2015 10:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Other psychic phenomenon?

I think the word "psychic" gets overused a bit. A LOT of what goes on in a brain is just a mystery.

I've definitely had moments I couldn't explain (like that dream about the dog biting me and then it did), but it doesn't really affect anything or change anything. I've had a few deja vu's that gave me a sense of calm, like that's what I was supposed to be doing.

I do see weird things in my head when I look at people. There was a guy on a commercial a few years ago and every time I looked at him I saw crying children, like he was a pedophile or something.

I like to think my subconscious just recognizes patterns that I'm not aware of, and then it throws me pictures that are in my memory.

PS I will say the day my grandpa died, my mom and I were on a vacation and she kept saying she needed to find a phone and call home, and it sure wasn't in her character to do that, and she didn't have a reason for doing it at the time...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 19, 2015 10:40 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:

...so for example the son of a woman with breast cancer has a greater chance of prostate cancer, the daughter of a man with prostate cancer has a greater chance of having breast cancer.

Are you able to get yourself genetically tested for the brca1 and brca2 genes?

That's what I was trying to say, yeah.
Mom has Brca2 -there's two kinds of it- she has the more fatal kind that only 15% of brca 2 sufferers have, and I believe the five year survival rate is 35%

At this point, it's numbers. "Balance of Probability" is something I say a lot, because -like Spock- I believe in the numbers. My numbers aren't good, so there is no point in paying for expensive tests to tell me my numbers aren't good. I already know that.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 19, 2015 11:27 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Well, unless your mom has a double-dose, there's a 50% chance your genes are perfectly OK.

I work with someone that has Alzheimer's on both sides of the grandparent generation. I was curious if he was interested in getting tested for the APOE4 gene - neither, single dose, or double dose. Three years later he hasn't decided afaik. I'm not sure what I would do if it looked like there might be a genetic test relevant to me. I think I might get my affairs in order to plan for the potentialities, then live my cleanest most healthful life possible, but not get tested until/ unless there was a possible course of action available to me.

When it comes to the brca genes, there's preventative mastectomy and hysterectomy, or extra vigilant testing.

But I have to say Wish - and I know easier said than done - but perhaps there's a way you can dial down your stress response. For decades I was deeply stressed by the serious illnesses in beloved family members and it wrecked my health. But now, in hindsight, I can say that all of that time and emotion and thought spent stressing did absolutely ZERO good. Sure, I also worked and studied and responded to make things better as best I could - and I like to think it was fruitful. But stressing itself? Not a good move. Focus on getting done what you can, not agonizing over what's beyond your control. And since stress is deeply destructive to health, I also think reducing your stress might improve your overall chances for a long and healthful life, which would be a good thing, and something I would 'wish' for you. :)

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 19, 2015 11:42 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Magons

I get a publication called The Scientist that focuses on biological/ ecological/ medical science. It's free for the asking. If you wish you could sign up for it, if you need some application information let me know and I can provide it to you. They published the results of a study in which researchers went back and re-analyzed drug-test studies where unpublished data was available for re-examination. It turned out that the results weren't as one-way as one might think. The 'hidden' studies were equally likely to support the drug as not.

However, that whole issue of biased research in all areas not just medical --- and over-hyped results, probability fishing, irreproducibility, publication 'impact factors', intellectual property constraints, severely reduced funding, revised US patent laws, research fraud ... and worst of all - the inability to publish negative results - is getting serious attention across the board. I deeply hope that needed change comes from this.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, April 20, 2015 8:46 AM

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Quote:
Originally posted by Wishimay:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3037305/Prostate-cancer-brea
kthrough-test-flags-aggressive-form-disease.html

The new breakthrough centers on the discovery of a protein which, when it combines naturally with phosphates in the body, seemed to activate genes that speed up the growth of tumours.

Soft drinks, soda drinks, especially cola or coke and fizzy lemonade
Cordials/fruit syrup beverages
Chocolate, lollies, sweets, candy, and anything else with a high citric acid and sugar content
Ice-cream
Skim milk powder (often added to processed foods)
Biscuits, cookies, cakes from the supermarket
Tomato ketchup
Mayonnaise
Fish fingers
Processed cheese, especially soft cheese spread
Frozen pizzas
Hot dogs
Processed meats

These are all processed foods. Should be kept to minimal or, if you have chronic health issues, avoided.

Quote:

Egg yolks
Milk
Nuts
Wheat germ
Soybeans and their by-products
Peas
Beans
Lentils
Corn
Mushrooms
Oats
Cocoa beans (chocolate)
Sweet breads - liver, brains, kidneys

These are not processed, or not necessarily processed, but I'd give the sweet breads a miss. Yock.

If your health is really bad, I can recommend you give Joel Furhman's Eat to Live diet a try. It's only 6 weeks, but he has a recommended way to eat regularly as well. It's basically lots and lots of greens and fruit, no meat, no dairy, limited protein and a few wholegrains. It's hard going, but I did feel AMAZING afterwards.

http://lowfatveganchef.com/eat-to-live-program-by-dr-fuhrman-overview/

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, April 20, 2015 9:28 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:

When it comes to the brca genes, there's preventative mastectomy and hysterectomy, or extra vigilant testing.

But I have to say Wish - and I know easier said than done - but perhaps there's a way you can dial down your stress response.

Won't be chopped up, thanks. I actually think the blood clot problem I had started when I had my gallbladder out years ago, don't think more surgeries would be good for me.

I don't know what made you think I was stressed about my DNA. I'm not. I'm interested in the research aspect because I like a good puzzler, but I gave up the idea I could ever be better again YEARS AGO. And believe me, no one knows better than I do that it could totally be worse.

I'm finally feeling better about my recent brush with mortality though. Not quite as panicked anymore. Just takes time.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, April 20, 2015 1:23 PM

REAVERFAN

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:

I look at good nutrition as being close to what we evolved with, because there are some nutritional requirements that you can't get around. And this list reminds of the list that vegans put out. Meat is the ONLY source of B12, and you need B12 to live. So the vegan list is suspect.

Your lack of knowledge about B 12 and vegans is suspect.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, April 20, 2015 1:48 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

There is SUPPLEMENTAL B12. But the only FOOD source of B12 comes from the flesh of animals ('animals' as in the biological classification - not plants, bacteria, fungi, archae etc) and which includes fish, crustaceans, birds, insects etc.

ETA: To extend this information some: it's the protists that make B12. But it's awfully hard for us to stay alive eating protists out there in the natural world. They're so small, and so dispersed. OTOH there are small things that eat the protists, and slightly less small things that eat the small things ... and so on down the line (or up the chain, whichever speaks to you) till you get to fish, that have concentrated all that vitally important B12 in a form we can eat. And there are the ruminants - animals with multiple stomachs - that have bacteria that digest the vegetation, and then they in turn digest the bacteria along with their B12. There are the non-ruminant ungulates - hoofed animals - that eat protists as they graze, and have a healthy set of bacteria in their vegetation-eating evolved digestive tracts that churn out B12 they then absorb. There are small bugs that eat protists, and larger bugs that eat smaller bugs ... and birds that eat the larger bugs and their store of B12.

Humans are not designed to eat primarily vegetation. Our teeth wear down and don't grow back, our guts are too short to maintain a life-sustaining set of vegetation-eating bacteria, and too fragile for the volume of roughage.

OTOH as primates we need vitamin C which is only found in plants, not animals. (A trait shared only with guinea pigs. Everything else - dogs, cats, chickens - makes its own vitamin C.)

In the natural world, without the aid of modern technology, we are evolved as OBLIGATE omnivores. We MUST eat BOTH plants and animals to get nutrients we need to keep ourselves alive.

But evolution is an odd thing. As we evolved, the diet we grew up with and the environment we lived in shaped other requirements as well. We need a tremendous amount of iodine compared with more inland animals. We need omega-three fatty acids found in fish - a whopping grams per day - for normal brain function. We need the amino acid taurine also found in fish for good cardiac health. We need choline, found in eggs, brains and eyes, kidneys, bone marrow and other areas with physiologically active fats (as opposed to storage or 'depot' fat). And humans are the only animal with endemic cystic fibrosis genes - a trait minimized by breathing air laden with saltwater. Humans aren't built for extreme activity either - it spikes cortisol and starts a destructive biochemical cascade - but constant low level activity is healthful, as is swimming at any level. And we're built for a modest level of food intake, as well as occasional fasting.

Anyway, I don't think we can know all the particular factors on which life and health depend. We might try to recreate some things artificially. I don't think we're going to get them all. The answer, I think, is to stay as close to our evolutionary circumstances as possible.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, April 20, 2015 2:58 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Wish

I was referring to stress over any kind of life event, not stress over bad genetics in particular. I guess I wasn't clear.

I personally have always been stress-prone. But looking back on things, I can't say that it helped any situation, and it definitely took a toll on my health. If I could go back I would try to cultivate a different response.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, April 20, 2015 8:36 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:
Originally posted by Wishimay:
I had my tonsils removed when I was six, and I distinctly remember floating above the bed looking at myself.

Brains is funny things.

were you afraid of using more than 10% of your brain? Or were others frightened or jealous or threatened by your abilities?
Quote:

I've had dozens of really clear deje vu kinda feelings, only I couldn't have done them before I had the feeling, for most of them...

Did your OBE and Deja Vu continue into adulthood? Or did somebody find some drugs to stop your ESP? Did you have other forms of Sensory Perception beyond the accepted 5? Other psychic phenomenon?

I am trying to convey a concept here, the idea. You may substitute whatever terms you prefer, or which you feel more comfortable with.

Quote:

Have you seen the film Suspect Zero? And the "demonstration" in the bonus features on the DVD?
Have you ever tried to perform Technical Remote Viewing?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, April 20, 2015 8:49 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:
Originally posted by Wishimay:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3037305/Prostate-cancer-brea
kthrough-test-flags-aggressive-form-disease.html

The new breakthrough centers on the discovery of a protein which, when it combines naturally with phosphates in the body, seemed to activate genes that speed up the growth of tumours.
The article only talks abut prostate cancer. WISH, I think that maybe prostate cancer isn't your most pressing problem.

The main article also mentions the protein accelerating the spread of cancer to other parts of the body.
And the side article mentions detection in bladder cancer as well.
No need to pretend that various cancers are not related in any way.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, April 20, 2015 11:01 PM