søndag den 28. juli 2013

DR og videnskab.dk's usaglige artikel om rawfood - med kommentarer

Først og fremmest vil jeg henvise til følgende indlæg, der med visuelle forklaringer fra en ernæringsudregner viser hvordan man til overflod får dækket sine næringsbehov på en fornuftig rawfood kost.
Det viser at man kan dække sit fulgt ind med både mineraler, vitaminer, proteiner, fedtsyrer osv. på en rå kost baseret på frugt.
Læs indlægget HER
(Undtaget er Dvit og b12 vit, som kan være relevante tilskud for ALLE nordboere, og for både kødspisere og veganere/rawfoodere)

Artiklen 'Rawfood kan gøre dig syg' har gjort mange bekymrede, og kritikere bruger den ivrigt.
Artiklen er skrevet på baggrund af studerenes gruppe arbejde, baseret på studier af optagelse af næring hos kødspisere, vegetarer og veganere -altså ikke rawfood. Det blander de med protein myten, andre myter og drager en 'konklusion' om rawfood. Artiklen er skrevet af en journalist. Så det er studerende's gruppearbejde fortolket af en journalist -tilsat en lektors utalelser. Lyder ikke som videnskab, gør det?

Derudover laver de en konklusion om al rå mad udfra nogle få (meget fedtholdige) retter fra en helt bestemt rawfood retning.

Det er et helt latterligt lille grundlag at konkludere ud fra. Det er jo videnskabelig uredelighed uanset hvilken kost man undersøger. Det er jo ligesom at ville undersøge kogt mad ud fra en hotdog, en skål cornflakes og en fryseret -og så lave en generel konklusion om at 'man bliver alvorligt syg af kogt mad'.

Fuldstændigt ligesom kogt mad, så kan en rawfood kost sættes sammen på mange måder.

Det kan på ingen måde bruges som grundlag for en videnskabelig eller saglig artikel eller en generel konklusion om rawfood, og det står klart at de er dybt uvidende mht rå kost.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Her udtalelser fra artiklen med kommentarer:

"Desværre ser virkeligheden ud til at være markant anderledes. Tilhængere af Raw Food risikerer i stedet at få alt for lidt livsvigtigt B12- og D-vitamin samt for lidt calcium, jod, selen og jern".

B12 mangel er et problem for mange i den vestlige verden, dette er ikke et problem der er forbeholdt veganere eller rawfoodere. Forskellen er dog at de fleste rawfoodere er meget opmærksomme på denne risiko.

Igen, det er der stor opmærksomhed omkring, at få sol nok -og nogle tager D vit tilskud . D vit mangel er et problem for ALLE nordboere, og de mængder man får fra animalske produkter i en 'almindelig ' kost er forsvindende lille.

"En kost lavet efter Raw Food-idealerne - hvor man blandt andet dropper kød, fisk, brød og mælk - indeholder også alt for få vigtige fedtsyrer og proteiner, som er afgørende for vores muskler, hud og immunforsvar".

Dette er ganske enkelt ikke sandt. Læs fx. The China Study, det største studie i human ernæring nogensinde. Eller se filmen www.forksoverknives.com

Se også eksempler på folk der har levet af rå mad i over 25 år her:
ER RÅ MAD EN FORNUFTIG KOST?

Se en rawfooders blodprøveresultater sort på hvidt:
HER 

De risikerer uden ekstra kosttilskud at løbe ind i dårligdomme som smerter eller lammelser i arme og ben, træthed og ødelagt appetit.

RAW FOOD-MENU 

Et eksempel på menuen på en dag med Raw Food:

Morgenmad: Yoghurt lavet på mandel, der har ligget i blød. Hertil hasselnødder, solsikkefrø, blåbær, kokosmel, æble, figne og appelsinjuice

Frokost: 'Basic Instinct-salat' med bl.a. : avocado, lucernespirer, tomat, agurk, olivenolie og hindbær

Mellemmåltid: Tørrede abrikoser

Aften: Lasagne med aubergine som plader, olivenolie, cashewnødder, avocadoolie, tomat, hvidløg, salt og peber
"I værste fald kan den ensidige føde udløse blodmangel, hjerteproblemer, muskel- og knogleproblemer, nervesygdomme og demens".

Denne udtalelse kan passe på ENHVER ensidig kost, det har intet særlig med rawfood at gøre!

Det er meget store påstande, uden nogen konkrete forklaringer eller begrundelser. Det er nemt at sprede frygt, sværere er det at komme med argumenter baseret på reel viden. Dette er tydeligt ikke andet end et skud i blinde, og forsøg på at få det til at lyde som saglig kritik af rå mad.

Omvendt viser utallige studier at kogt mad / standard vestlig kost forårsager cancer, diabetes, knogleskørhed mm.
Se fx denne samling af videnskabeligt materiale:
http://www.plantemad.dk/links.html

"Susanne Gjedsted Bügel hæfter sig især ved, at Raw Food tilsyneladende giver for lidt af en aminosyre. "


Det må være den meget, meget gamle myte om protein komplimentering de taler om her. Det er ligefrem sørgeligt og pinligt at vi stadig skal trækkes med den slags for længst modbeviste teorier.

Læs her hvorfor det IKKE er et problem: http://rawquest.dk/raakost/protein.htm

"Fodarbejdet er lavet under vejledning af Susanne Gjedsted Bügel af to grupper bachelorstuderende på Institut for Human Ernæring.
Grupperne har - måske som de første i verden -både kigget den videnskabelige litteratur igennem og lavet en kostplan med tilfældigt udvalgte retter fra bogen 'Raw food for livet'."

Det er faktisk en udtalelse der fik mig til at grine højt. I hvert fald må man skuffe dem : I er ikke de første !! Selvfølgelig er i da ikke de første!!  


"Gennemgangen af kosten er sammenholdt med en række undersøgelser af næringsoptaget hos kødspisere og vegetarer samt hos veganere, der på mange måder minder om Raw Food-spisere."

Se, så begynder det at blive interessant. En gruppe studerende har 'undersøgt' -og ikke mindst konkluderet- en masse om RAWFOOD ved at undersøge KØDSPISERE, VEGETARER OG VEGANERE.  Det kan da ikke falde ind under reel videnskab!

»Nødderne er i den grad en hjørnesten i det her. Hvis man overvejer at blive Raw Food-veganer og ikke kan lide nødder, så skal man holde sig langt væk, for det er det, de overlever på,« konstaterer Susanne Gjedsted Bügel.

Det er ganske enkelt ikke korrekt. Mange tusinde mennesker verden rundt lever af rå mad og har ingen eller ganske få nødder i deres kost.
Man kan hilse på mange af dem her : www.30bananasaday.com et forum med over 9000 medlemmer der lever på frugtbaseret kost -og hvor historier om sygdomme der forsvinder er dagligdag.
Flere næringsstoffer i frugtkost når op på over tusinde gange ADT i bare et enkelt måltid:
http://rawfooddenmark.ning.com/forum/topics/et-typisk-801010-morgen...

"En kongstanke inden for Raw Food-bølgen er, at vigtige enzymer i maden bliver smadret, hvis man varmer maden op til mere end 42 grader.
»Når man spiser grøntsager, bliver enzymerne alligevel nedbrudt af mavesyren og fordøjelsesenzymer i tarmen. Enzymerne kan slet ikke optages, før de er nedbrudt til mindre bestanddele, som kan bruges til at bygge nye proteiner og enzymer i kroppen.«"

Ja, det er korrekt : http://rawfooddenmark.ning.com/forum/topics/raa-handler-det-om-enzymer
Men det ændrer ikke ved at den overordnede næringsværdi falder når man opvarmer maden. Der de utallige mange andre gode grunde der er til at leve af rå, vegansk mad og de helt konkrete og målbare forberinger i helbreddet som folk oplever verden over.
Der er efterhånden så mange dokumenterede personlige beretninger om forbedret helbred derude, at det giver et klart billede af kostens fordele.

"Mange grøntsager bliver tværtimod sundere for mennesker, når de bliver kogt. Vi kan meget lettere optage grøntsagers betakaroten - der bliver omdannet til A-vitamin i kroppen - når bindinger i grøntsagerne bliver frigjort ved opvarmning."

At man evt kan gøre enkelte næringsstoffer mere tilgængelige ved mere eller mindre at smadre resten er ikke et godt argument. Desuden handler god ernæring i høj grad om balancen og sammensætningen af næringsstoffer i vores mad, så at se på isolerede stoffer giver ikke mening. 
Myten om vitaminer og opvarming, læs mere her : http://drjacob.se/?p=30

»Men som Raw Food-veganer skal man være meget opmærksom for at få nok energi og at få dækket sit proteinbehov

Ja, det er meget vigtigt at være at spise nok, og spise det rigtige på en rå kost. Det gør vi også meget ud af her på siden.
Der er nok protein i plantebaseret kost til det dække vores behov for protein. Igen vil jeg henvise til The China Study -det største studie af human ernæring nogensinde! 
Desuden står det enhver frit for at slå fødevarer op i næringsdatabaser. Det taler sit eget enkle og tydelige sprog.

Kvinden bør normalt spise 10-12 MJ om dagen. Ifølge beregningerne får hun kun mellem 6 og 11 MJ.
»Hvis hun er bare lidt mere aktiv, end hun er på en typisk dag, så er hendes totale energiindtag så meget i underkanten, at hun reelt sulter, hvis hun følger anbefalingerne i kogebogen,« konstaterer Susanne Gjedsted Bügel.

Ja, selvfølgelig er det for lidt.
Vi skal spise meget større volumen. DET VED VI GODT :)



Skrevet af Cecillia Malou
3/2 2011

Eksperter i lommen på medicinalindustrien

Mange danskerne (ifølge min erfaring) lever i en verden, hvor snyd og bedrag sker kun i USA og som om det aldrig kunne ske i Danmark. Men det er langtfra sandheden. Sundhedsstyrelsen styrer ikke mod sundhed, som de fleste ville tro, men mod symptombehandling og anbefalinger fra eksperter, som er i lommen på medicinalindustri.

Medicinalindustri begrænser sig ikke kun til lægemidler, de store koncerner beskæftiger sig med mange andre ting og staten er i lommen lige så meget som eksperter, gennem deres investeringsfonde.

For at forstå sammenhænge og hvorfor man selv skal sørge for sit helbred, anbefaler jeg flere bøger, bla.:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Medical-Mafia-Alive-Health-Wealth/dp/096441...

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Confessions-Medical-Heretic-Robert-Mendelso...

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Side-Effects-Death-Confessions-Pharma-Insid...


Her er de seneste nyheder fra pressen:
(Er det ikke tankevækkende, at en professor mener, at kun 15-20% har gavn af medicinen og Lundbecks mand mener, at det er 70-80%?) :o)

MetroXpress har spurgt Lægeforeningen og Psykologforeningen om deres holdning til, at 460.000 fik lykkepiller i 2010.
Presseklip: Roal Ulrichsen, formand for Dansk Psykolog Forening:

- Det er langt over, hvad der er nødvendigt. De, der skal have medicin, er dem, der ikke har energi til at gå ned til psykiateren eller psykologen for at tale om sig selv. Og det virker meget påfaldende, at så mange skulle have det så dårligt. Desuden har jeg tillid til, når Esben Hougaard siger, at det kun er 15-20 procent af dem, der lider af depression eller angst i moderat til svær grad, der har gavn af medicinen, siger formand for Dansk Psykolog Forening til MetroXpress.

Henrik Dibbern, formand for Lægeforeningen:
- Vi læger må stå ved, at vi har udskrevet den her medicin. Men selv om vi er universitetsuddannede, er vi ikke immune over for nogen, der har så mange ressourcer som medicinalvirksomhederne. De har fra starten fortalt os, at medicinen havde en relativt stor effekt og var uden alt for mange bivirkninger. De har betalt meget af den forskning, der ligger på området. De betaler for vores efteruddannelse og sender ofte reklamer og deres såkaldte lægemiddelkonsulenter ud til os, siger han til MetroXpress.


Anders Gersel Pedersen, Læge og udviklingsdirektør i medicinalvirksomheden Lundbeck, der blandt andet producerer det antidepressive middel cipralex:
- Mit skøn er, at der er 250.000 danskere, der skal have behandling for depression med antidepressiv medicin. Og at der er mellem 100.000 og 150.000 danskere, der skal have behandling med medicin mod angst. Cirka 70-80 procent af dem med en moderat til svær depression responderer på medicinsk behandling, siger altså Anders Gersel Pedersen til MetroXpress.



http://www.dp.dk/da/Aktuelt/Nyhedsoversigt/Alt%20for%20mange%20faar...

http://www.metroxpress.dk/nyheder/lykkepiller-gives-pa-tvivlsomt-gr...

http://www.metroxpress.dk/nyheder/eksperter-i-lommen-pa-lykkepillef...



Skrevet af Petr Cech
9/6 2011 

Hvad er sygdom? (Engelsk)

Toxemia Is The Universal Cause Of Disease

Actually, there is only one disease, no matter how it manifests itself. And the disease, which we call construc­tive disease, is occasioned by the body itself and is known as a crisis of toxemia or healing.

3.1 The Seven Stages of Disease

There are several stages of disease. The underlying cause of disease in all stages is toxemia. Although toxemia may arise from many sources, it basically exists because of insufficient nerve energy to sufficiently eliminate exoge­nous poisons and body wastes. Toxemia is not broad enough a term to cover the whole poisoning process for it means poison in the blood. Actually toxicosis exists.

Tissues, cells and interstitial spaces are also toxic-laden. In short, the whole body is toxic.
Diseases present many different aspects because they evolve with the progressing deterioration of the organism that suffers them. Disease has seven distinct stages. These stages correspond to the distinct differences of each stage of evolution.

3.1.1. Enervation

The first stage is not even recognized by physicians as a disease. Life Scientists call it enervation.

Most people call it nervous exhaustion. Enervation is a state in which the body is either not generating sufficient nerve energy for the tasks the body must perform, or the tasks the body must perform may be greater than the normal nerve energy supply can cope with. In any event, the body becomes impaired, and an impaired body generates less nerve energy if the conditions of overwork or under-generation persist.

Most people know when they are ner­vously exhausted.

Enervation can be caused by depletion of nerve energy in any of hundreds of ways. Sleep regenerates nerve energy. Obviously, insufficient sleep will not supply us with our needs. It will not fully recharge our batteries. We need sleep to regenerate nerve energy for the brain and nervous system.

Nerve energy is a form of electricity measurable in millivolts. Sleep laboratories have successfully substituted electricity in place of the body's own. When this is accom­plished it is called electrosleep. It takes only two hours out of twenty-four to fully restore nerve energy in this manner.

Demonstrating that nerve energy is electrical is easy. If you mashed your finger, a message would immediately go to the brain and back would come a command to remove the finger from that which applied the pressure. Moreover, the brain would command the entire balance of the body to cooperate in the extraction of the finger from the offending pressure. Only electricity is capable of such speedy transmission. No chemical process or circulatory process is capable of this dispatch.

It occurs only through a network of nerves with conductive abilities, and electricity is the only form of energy it can conduct. If you take a weak voltage and hook up to it while holding someone else's hand, the other person gets a shock immediately when you touch the live electrical source. I don't think anyone can doubt that we do generate electricity, and that is the form of energy we use to conduct our physical and mental activities. Sensations are transformed into electrical stimuli and forwarded to the brain. The brain interprets these and sends out commands based upon the inter­pretation.

Thus, if you put your finger to a hot object, the finger is commanded in a flash to withdraw from it.

The foregoing is to demonstrate that the body is primarily an organism that works on the amount of electricity it generates and which it has in its reserves. If this supply is depleted or otherwise insufficient to cope with the needs of the body, then body functions become impaired, including the processes of elimination of both endogenous metabolic wastes and exogenous poisons introduced into the body.

This impairment begets further impairment including diminishing the body's ability to restore depleted nerve energy. The body starts going downhill. The next stage of this decline is called toxemia.

3.1.2. Toxemia or Toxicosis

When toxic substances from whatever source saturate the blood and tissues, the lymph system and interstitial fluids, then the conditions of toxemia and toxicosis exist.
As functioning organisms, we generate a tremendous amount of toxic by-products. We generate enough carbon dioxide to kill us within a few minutes. If our lungs failed to function, carbon dioxide buildup and lack of oxygenation would overwhelm us quite quickly. We can accommo­date only so much carbon dioxide. And this is but one of many waste products. There are trillions of cells in the human body. Tens of billions of these expire every day. They are replaced by new cells. The old cells are broken down by lysosomes, enzymes that reside in a little organelle within the cell itself. Upon cell death, these enzymes break the cell down into many smaller compo­nents for elimination. These components are cell debris. Some of these components such as iron, protein, and amino acids are recycled by the body. Some 95% of the body's iron needs and 70% of its protein needs are met by recycling. Certain other of the body's needs are met by recycling as well. This will give you some idea as to the immense providence and wisdom of the body in meeting its needs. Other components of the decomposed cell are the RNA and DNA. These are toxic while in the system. If they accumulate as they do in most humans in today's society, a condition of intoxication (toxemia and toxicosis) exists. These are what medical people call viruses, and they mistakenly attribute to this dead debris the powers of life and malevolence.
Tissue and blood saturation with toxic materials can be caused by both internally generated wastes and pollutants taken in from the outside which the body has not been able to eject from the vital domain. Intoxication occurs when we overload the body with toxic materials from the outside, or we fail to observe our capacities, and overwork, get insuf­ficient sleep, or are subjected to great stress, or when any number of other factors deplete the body of nerve energy or prevent its sufficient regeneration. For instance, stresses, emotional shocks, or traumatic experiences can drain our bodies of nerve energy very quickly. It's just like shorting out the battery of a car.
At some level of intoxication we begin to experience the next stage of disease which is called irritation.

3.1.3. Irritation

Irritation results from toxic materials being sensed by our nerve network. Most of us pay this stage little mind, and certainly physicians do not pay it heed. When we feel itchy, queasy, jumpy, uneasy, or when we have bothersome but not painful areas, irritation exists. Tickling of the nose is a form of irritation. Collections of mucus along the mucus membranes irritate, although irri­tation is not painful. It is a gentle prod that moves us to seek comfort, to establish freedom from it. For instance, the urge to urinate or defecate is a form of irritation due to accumulation of wastes greater than the body feels comfortable with. However, the urge is not painful unless it is ignored until it creates too much pressure in its area.

Near painful irritation forces us to deal with the problem.
When a person drinks too much alcohol we say that he or she is intoxicated. That's a good example of exogenous intoxication. While all alcohol intake is damaging to the organism, the body can speedily eliminate a small amount before much damage has occurred. Increase the intake, and the elimination is proportionately less and the damage proportionately greater. The first drink of alcohol occa­sions only irritation which we also call stimulation. But any toxic material, be it salt, caffeine, or condiments will irritate or stimulate. This is a condition wherein the body sets in force its defensive mechanisms and accelerates its internal activities. This might well be likened to an alarm aboard ship where all hands are summoned. A frenzy of activity results in a bout with enemy forces.

Unfortunately, this often makes us feel good or hyper or even euphoric. It is distressing to see a euphoric condition arise out of a situation that is damaging to the organism.
If the causes of enervation/intoxication/irritation re­main in force and the body can't cope with it the body initiates a responsive crisis called inflammation.

3.1.4. Inflammation

This is usually the stage in which physicians recognize pathology. It is the stage where sufferers are keenly aware of a problem, for it involves pain. As well, it involves bodily redirection of vital energies.

The intestinal tract is closed down. Energy that would normally be available for activity there is pre-empted and redirected to the massive effort to cope with a severe condition of intoxication. Lest the integrity of the organism be dealt a mortal blow or crippled, the body musters its all to the emergency.
In inflammation, the toxicants have usually been concentrated in an organ or area for a massive expulsive effort. The area becomes inflamed due to the constant irritation of the toxic materials. When inflammation exists we are said to have an "itis," appendicitis, tonsilitis, hepatitis, or nephritis for example. Note that the "itises" just cited are all due to overburdening of four different organs of purification and elimination.
The names of "itises" are usually after the organ or tissue area that is inflamed. Thus if we have a cold we have rhinitis. If we have inflammation of the sinus cavities we have sinusitis. If we have inflammation of bronchial tissue we have either bronchitis or asthma. And so it goes. We have these peculiar pathologies because in each case the body elected to eliminate the extraordinary toxic load through the organ affected. For instance, asthma exists because the body has selected the bronchi as an outlet for toxic materials. The condition is chronic because the toxic condition is unceasing. While the sufferer continues to intoxicate himself or herself, the body continues to eliminate the overload through the bronchi or alveolar tissue.
Inflammation or fever is a body crisis response to a life-threatening situation. The body and the body alone creates the fever. It is an evidence or symptom of increased and intense body activities directed at cleansing and repair. The extraordinary energies employed for a fever are at the expense of energies normally involved in digestion, work or play, thinking and seeing, etc. Fever is a healing activity. The idea of suppressing it is equivalent to hitting a drowning man over the head so he'll cease his struggles. For instance, if rhinitis or influenza sufferers are drugged it amounts to hitting the body's healer over the head. Thus, the eliminative effort is suppressed, and the toxicity increases until other organs, usually the lungs, become saturated—not only with the toxicity but the drugs administered as well. When body vitality reasserts itself a condition known as pneumonia is likely to result.

Inflammation is the fourth stage of disease and is the body's most intense effort to cleanse and restore itself. The next stage of disease is destructive and degenerative. It will result if the causes of general body intoxication are continued.

3.1.5. Ulceration

Ulceration means that a staggering amount of cells and tissue structures are, being destroyed. Physiological systems are wiped out due to the body's inability to live in an unceasing toxic media. Where tissue is destroyed there remains a void. An example is a canker sore of the mouth. Lesions or ulcers can occur in other areas of the body also. These conditions are often intensely painful, for there are exposed nerves.
While the body may use an ulcer as an outlet for extra­ordinary toxic buildup thereby relieving itself, it will heal the ulcer if causes are discontinued, or if the toxicity level is significantly lowered. This process of repairing the damage is like patching up pants with holes in them. This patching up process is called induration.

3.1.6. Induration

Induration is a hardening of tissue or the filling in of tissue vacancy with hard tissue. Scarring is a form of induration. But in this stage of disease, there is direction and purpose in hardening. The space is filled, and the toxic materials that threaten bodily integrity are encap­sulated in a sac of hardened tissue. The ulcer and the toxic materials are sealed off by the hardening of the tissue around them. This is a way of quarantining the toxic materials, often called tumor formation. It is this condition that is diagnosed as cancer nineteen times out of twenty when, in fact, no cancer exists.
Induration is the last stage during which the body exerts intelligent control. Should the pathogenic practices which brought matters to this stage be continued, cells and tissue systems go wild. They survive as best they can on their own. Cells become parasitic—living off the nutrients they can obtain from the lymph fluid but contri­buting nothing to the body economy. They have become disorganized. Their genetic encoding has been altered by the poisons. Thus, they are not capable of intelligent normal organized action within the context of a vital economy. When cells go wild in this manner, the condition is called cancer.

3.1.7. Cancer

The endpoint of the evolution of disease is cancer. It is the last stage of disease and is usually fatal, especially if the causes that brought it about are continued. Cessation of causes and indulgence of healthful practices may arrest it, for they can so revitalize the body that they may even destroy the cancer cells. It's all relative. Cancer cells live in a hostile environment but still divide and flourish as long as nutrients are available to them. Cancer cells may be regarded as cells that have become independent and have reverted to the status of uncontrolled primitive cells—cells that live entirely on their own as do protozoa.

These stages of disease are quite distinct in their characters, yet the lines are more or less arbitrarily drawn. This often happens in attempts at categorization where one form evolves into another. The dividing lines have no clear-cut delineation.
People sometimes ask when cancer begins. Hygienists or Life Scientists say that it begins with the first cold or rash of childhood. The first crisis a baby endures begins the pathological chain that leads to cancer. This evolutionary chain begins then because the phenomenon of life is one constant violation of the laws of life from beginning to end.

3.2. Viruses And Bacteria—Their Role In Disease

After reviewing the seven stages of disease it should be obvious that bacteria and so-called viruses do not cause diseases. Viruses do cause diseases if you call toxic waste materials of decomposed body cells viruses. Decomposed cell debris is precisely what virologists and physicians are calling viruses. They regard viruses as living entitities when, in fact, medics have not in all history observed any quality of life they ascribe to viruses. What is called virus is always dead. It's never been observed to be alive. It doesn't have the first prerequisites of life, that is, metabolic and control mechanisms. Even bacteria have that. I repeat that what is called viruses are nothing more than components of decomposed cells.

Some people insist that syphilis is caused by bacteria, more specifically spirochetes. Though the term spirochetes has given way to viruses called Herpes these days—that's today's fashion—it was easy to demonstrate that spirochetes were never responsible in the first place. When you ask a bacteriologist which comes first, the soil or the bacteria, he will answer that the soil must exist first for bacteria to thrive, for bacteria are presented a deadly environment by living cells.

So, bacteria never exist in a proliferating state where there is no food or soil for their propagation. They multiply when there is feast, and they die off when there is famine or adverse environment, hence, bacteria no more create their food supply than flies cause garbage. The garbage must preexist the flies and, on the same order, the garbage or soil on which bacteria thrive in our bodies must preexist their presence and propagation. In other words, they do not cause the condition—they are there because of the condition.

When the body has a highly toxic condition such as inflammation, it will absorb bacteria from the intestinal cavity and transport them to the point where deadly materials have been concentrated.

The bacteria then symbiotically assist in breaking up these toxic materials for elimination. Of course, the excreta of bacteria are toxic, too.

Ignorant physicians regard these bacteria not as our symbiotic partners in the process of combating disease, but as the cause of the disease. Koch destroyed Pasteur's original theories by his four postulates. The first two state that if a disease is caused by a certain type of bacterium, then that form of bacteria must always be present when the disease exists. The other says that the disease must always be occasioned by the presence or introduction of the bacteria said to be responsible.

Although these cardinal principles are self-evident, so many exceptions existed as to disprove totally the germ theory of disease-causation. Koch laid down his postulates in 1892; the medical profession never has given them credence. To this day the profession clings to the disproven germ theory except that germs in the form of bacteria are taking a back seat to an even more elusive entity called a virus.

Bacteria exist in a multitude of strains, forms, and metabolic capabilities. Bacteria are versatile and in many cases change forms and lifestyles in keeping with the character of the soil available to them.
Round bacteria can become rod shaped and vice versa.

It used to be said that pneumococcus caused pneu­monia. But it was noted that this type of bacteria was absent in nearly half the cases. Moreover, administering the bacteria to healthy organisms never occasioned pneumonia. The plain fact that bacteria are in the human body as they are everywhere else is not recognized by the medical profession. Bacteria are symbiotic partners of all creatures in nature. In order to come to exist in nature in the first place, humans had to establish a state of symbiosis with all natural forces.

In the second place, if bacteria invaded organisms and laid them low as they're supposed to do—if the body could be laid low while in a state of health—then the impetus or momentum the bacteria had built up would become more pronounced and overwhelming as the organism receded in disease.

It would be a one-way trip the same as vultures picking the bones of a cadaver. If bacteria and viruses cause disease, once they have overwhelmed the body and actually debilitated it, how does the much weakened body regain ascendancy? If you were to inquire into this deeply and pursue it to its logical conclusions, you'd find that, once a body has lost the battle while in a state of health, it's going to lose the war after being disabled.

3.3 Disease Complicated by By-Products of Symbiotic Bacteria


At their strongest, bacteria complicate disease because the by­products of bacterial fermentation or putrefaction are deadly poison. In fermentation the by-products are lactic acid, acetic acid or vinegar, and alcohol. Putre­faction involves nitrogenous foods or proteins. The by-products of rotting protein are ammonias, indoles, skatoles, purines, etc. They are toxic within organisms, although the body can normally eliminate these poisons. In fact, our feces and urine are loaded with the by-products of protein decomposition, both from our body decomposi­tion and bacterial decomposition.

You've heard of the ideal of living in a germ-free en­vironment. That is an impossibility, of course.

Trillions of bacteria are in and on our bodies at all times. If we were free of these minute organisms, we'd soon die. They perform many essential services for us which will be discussed in a later lesson. Suffice it to say that we live symbiotically with bacteria.

Bacteria are wrongfully blamed for our own indiscre­tions. It's the rare medic who doesn't find a scapegoat for his client and remove responsibility for problems from the shoulders of the sufferer.

Medical logic is not very logical. According to medical thinking, bacteria or viruses invade our bodies and destroy our cells. It would seem that our body defenses permit this by their intimations.

It would seem that once these invading entities have a headstart they would not stop destroying the rest of the cells of the organism, especially as the first strike has crippled the organism and lessened its ability to defend itself. By medical logic, the bacteria are there in greater numbers, for they proliferate astro­nomically when they've found a feast situation. How can the body reverse this situation and recover? '

The medics believe that they administer drugs that kill off the bacteria so that the body can have a chance to recover. Also, they have people believing that medicines are healing agents or that they assist in healing.

When you start asking deep penetrating questions into the causes of disease, the medical theories fall of their own weight. They cannot be sustained in the face of self-evident truths. So we have to find the rational basis for disease causation.

Disease has a sole unitary cause. It is instituted and conducted by the body itself. It is the only organized entity capable of coordinating the various processes of disease. Disease is occasioned when toxic materials that we have generated within or taken in from without are uneliminated due to the body's inability to cope with them. These debilitate and devitalize the organism until, at a point where it can no longer tolerate the growing toxic load at its mean level of vitality, the body institutes a crisis, redirecting its body energies to the enemy within.

Let's go back to pneumonia. Physicians worry that when a person has a cold or the flu, it will become pneumonia. It occurs so many times among their patients that they make "heroic" efforts to prevent this. They administer drugs galore. Yet, pneumonia occurs so frequently despite the drugging that doctors feel powerless in the face of pneumonia, one of the primary causes of death in our society. The question arises: what causes pneumonia then? Does pneumococcus survive the drug onslaught and cause pneumonia anyway?

If colds are, as we teach, a cleansing process, how does a body that is in crisis get yet worse? If the body is elimi­nating toxic materials profusely through the respiratory tract as in colds and flu, then how do the lungs also be­come contaminated?

All cases of colds and flu recover very quickly if the sufferer goes to bed in an airy room with lots of natural daylight. Almost total rest is called for. Total abstention from food but plenty of pure water is needed.

Under these conditions debility ceases in from one to three days. But, if the sufferer refuses to rest and continues to eat the same bad food that contributed heavily to the crisis in the first place, the eliminative effort may be less than the continued toxic buildup, in which case pneumonia may be a concomitant. But, if the sufferer goes to a medic and gets drugged in addition, the body turns its attention to eliminating the drugs. It may cease the cold or flu altogether in face of the greater enemy.

The continued toxic buildup spreads to the lungs. The drugs and toxic materials may concentrate so strongly in the lungs as to cause death or to set the stage for cancer. Many autopsies reveal people who have had pneumonia or who have smoked or lived in highly polluted air have tumors, indurated sacs of lung tissue which encapsulate toxic substances in the lungs. Many cases of long fasts have been conducted in which pneumonia had been suffered many years before. The drugs that had been given had been noted to make their exit from the lungs during the course of the fast as the body autolyzed the tumors and expelled their contents.

Yet, despite the obvious causes of pneumonia, medical professionals are still saying that pneumococcus causes pneumonia when, in fact, more than 25% of pneumonia cases never have pneumococcus. Now that medics are getting more and more away from the germ theory of disease causation they're invoking viruses as the culprits. This is true only if by viruses we mean uneliminated metabolic wastes. But when you start probing into what viruses are and how they cause disease, you might call this the "evil spirit" theory of disease, for the medics imbue viruses with all the qualities of malevolent spirits.

Such blindness characterizes the medical profession. The purpose of disease is so evident that medics can't see it. Just as with the guard in the concentration camp, they are looking for something that doesn't exist and they over­look that which they see so plainly all the time.
Medical researchers have chronicled over 20,000 different diseases.

They name almost every variation. They have multiple names because of the number of organs or tissue systems that exhibit symptoms. All of this is only one disease. And the disease, which we call constructive disease, is occasioned by the body itself and is known as toxemia or toxicosis.


Taget fra http://www.rawfoodexplained.com/sitemap.html

Food Combining - Hvordan "kombinerer" jeg min mad bedst?


Jeg syntes i starten at det var lidt uoverskueligt det der med food combining og slet ikke sikker på om det var noget jeg behøvede at forholde mig til. Men jeg ku ret hurtigt mærke, at der var bestemte kombinationer af fødevarer som min mave reagerede negativt på. Så jeg Googlede 'food combining' og valgte at se billedresultaterne. Der er en hel masse skemaer som er forskellige i layout, men ret ens i indhold. Jeg har printet det her ud, som nu hænger på mit køleskab og jeg konsulterer det en gang i mellem hvis jeg er i tvivl:



Jeg synes hurtigt man lærer de overordnede regler.

Derudover vil jeg sige, og det er bare min personlige holdning, at jeg synes at medmindre man går 100% raw eller 80/10/10 fra den ene dag til den anden. så synes jeg IKKE at det er noget man skal fokusere på fra starten når man omlægger sin kost. Der er andre ting der er vigtigere, som at lære at finde ordentlig moden frugt, at købe ind så man hele tiden har det hjemme man skal spise, AT SPISE NOK KALORIER, etc. Men når man har styr på de ting og vil videre i processen, så synes jeg at Food Combining er godt at kigge nærmere på :)

Der er mange derude, find den som du nemmest kan aflæse (nogle mennesker er mest til tekst og andre er til farvekoder, billeder etc) og find en i en ordentlig opløsning så du kan printe den i en læsbar kvalitet.
Et par andre eksempler:











Skrevet af Nina Kristine Olofsson
28/11 2011


Juice - En hjælp til fordøjelsen


Naturlig kost

801010/frugtarisme sigter i høj grad efter at komme så tæt på vores oprindelige og naturlige kost som muligt.

For nogen kan det dog i starten være en udfordring at kosten har så meget større volumen og fiberindhold, end vi har vant til i generationer.
Det er især hvis man er ny på kosten, eller hvis man har et sart mave tarm system at det kan give problemer.

Selvom frugt og grønt er det optimale for os, og er det vores fordøjelse er bygget til, så er det en stor omstilling.
Ligesom hvis man starter med at motionere efter lang tids inaktivitet, så kan det også være godt at huske på at kroppen skal have en chance for at følge med.





Tipoldefar på frugt
Vi har i den vestlige verden i mange generationer levet af kogt, forarbejdet og raffineret mad. En kost lav på fibre, og høj på fedt. Efter sigende er vores fordøjelsesvædsker også meget svage i forhold til mennesker og dyr, der lever på en naturlig kost, og det kan også tage noget tid at balancere.

 Så hvis man tænker på hvor langt man skal tilbage i sit stamtræ for at finde en tiptiptiptip forfader der levede af naturlig kost; friskt frugt og grønt. Det giver det måske en idé om hvorfor vi har brug for lidt tid til at lade kroppen finde sin balance igen.
Så hvis du er en måned eller et halvt år om at vænne dig til kosten, og synes at det da er frygtelig lang tid, så send en tanke langt tilbage i dit stamtræ; der er nok en stor chance for at deres fordøjelse heller ikke var optimal.
Det kan måske sætte tingene lidt i perspektiv, og give lidt tålmodighed og respekt til kroppen og det store omstillingsarbejde den er i gang med.

Tygning og fordøjelse

Når vi tygger vores mad grundigt, så findeler vi maden, men vi danner også spyt som starter processen med at nedbryde og fordøje maden. Især grøntsager / bladgrønt kræver virkelig meget tygning for at vi kan optage det optimalt, og det ikke generer fordøjelsen.
Når vi taler om at tygge grundigt, så gætter jeg på at de fleste tænker at det er lig med et par ekstra tyggebevægelser for hver bid.
Jeg er ikke abeekspert, men jeg gætter på at aber bruger en meget stor del af dagen på at sidde og gnaske i bladgrønt og frugt. De har jo ligesom tiden og roen til det.


Det er jo ikke lige det den vestlige livsstil lægger op til. Både rent tidsmæssigt er de færreste nok indstillet på at afsætte en stor del af dagen til 'gnaskeri', og rent mentalt er vi slet ikke vant til at tygge så længe og den fornemmelse det er.
 
Så selvom det ville være optimalt hvis vi alle kunne sidde i en bananpalme og træne vores tænder og kæber op til at kunne tygge det hele så grundigt som nødvendigt, så er det måske ikke altid det lige er en mulighed.

Så hvorfor ikke hjælpe os selv og naturen lidt på vej hvis der er brug for det.

For nogle er det tilstrækkeligt at lave grønne smoothies af bladgrønt, og derudover holde sig til bløde grntsager som agurk, squash osv.

For andre skal der lidt mere hjælp til.
Fibrene fra frugt og grønt er som udgangspunkt godt at få med hvis det er muligt, men som beskrevet er ikke alle maver i form til det, når man kommer direkte fra en dansk standard kost.

Hvis maven ikke er i form til det, og man ikke blot ender med ondt i maven og mindre end optimalt fordøjelse fordi maven ganske enkelt ikke kan følge med, så udnytter vi ikke vores mad fuldt ud og generer vores mave-tarm system.

For hvilken glæde har vi af maden hvis vi ikke kan optage den? Vi kan spise det sundeste økologiske frugt og grønt, men hvis det stryger lige igennem os, så hjælper det os ikke meget.


Helbredelse og udrensning.

Mange tager i en periode en 'juice feast', dvs de lever udelukkende af juice fra frugt og grønt, og har stor glæde af det.
Fordøjelsen optager en meget stor del af kroppens nerveenergi, nogle mener omkring 50%. SÅ hvis man fjerne fibrene fra frugten og det grønne gør man fordøjelsen meget lettere, og sætter dermed en masse nerveenergi fri til andre opgaver.
De kan være opgaver som udrensning, opheling og reperation af gamle og nye skader i kroppen. Det kan give organer og væv en mulighed for at få 'ryddet op' i ting som førhen måtte sættes til side fordi energien var krævet andets steds i kroppen.

Det er dog vigtigt at mærke efter om en juicefeast giver dig problemer med blodsukkeret. Det kan være en hjælp at drikke juice langsomt over dagen, men vær stadig opmærksom.
For det er jo fibrene i frugten som giver den blide blodsukker stigning.


Skal jeg juice?
Kun du har svaret :)
Hvis du har et velfungerende helbred og et godt velvære, hvis du nyder en stor lækker salat med masser af dejligt grønt uden problemer fra maven, så er det perfekt. Det samme med grønne smoothies.
Men hvis du synes det generer din mave, og har svært ved at spise nok på den måde, så kan det være juicing kan være en hjælp.

Ud over en ren juice feast, kan du også bruge det som supplement til din frugt kost. For det kan hjælpe en til at få spist nok grønt, og generelt at have plads nok i maven til at få spist nok i løbet af dagen til at møde ens kalorie behov -begge dele ting som er vigtige især i starten.

Det kan også være en mulighed for at kunne indkorporere flere slags grønt i kosten, som i hel tilstand ville være for hårdt at tygge. Det kan give variation som især kan være tiltrængt i vinterhalvåret, og det kan også lette økonomien da fx rodfrugter og kål er meget billigere end det meste bladgrønt.


Skrevet af Cecilla Malou 
29/11 2011 

Blodsukker, frugt og rawfood

Mange forbinder frugt/frugtsukker med noget man skal passe på med, hvis man har problemer med blodsukkeret.  Ofte er det den søde smag i sig selv, der gør at man mere eller mindre bevidst konkluderer at det må være i sammen kategori som slik, kager, sodavand osv. Altsammen ting vi har lært skal begrænses i kosten. At have en 'sød tand' bliver stort set altid nævnt som en
 dårlig vane.
http://api.ning.com/files/*O7s5BQGzjwVqs0gemHxJAGgmdclkDLv1HYq-vfGbMxpaa5h7NhWk2Zkpz1qR1V3UzDAkcebzu7FSV95z2z9RTOdIRZWSLhJ/th_CIMG5284.jpg
Alligevel bliver de fleste overraskede over, at fx pasta, ris, kartofler og brød har højere glykæmisk load end frugt. Det vil sige, at den kogte kartoffel giver en mere pludselig blodsukker stigning, og dermed også hurtigere blodsukker fald.

 

Helt konkrete eksempler på glykæmisk load:
cornflakes 33 (højt!)
linse og broccoli-suppe 31
basmati ris 24
pasta 24
havregrød 21
majs 20
bagt kartoffel  19
minestronesupper 18
kidneybønner 17
banan 11
mango 8
appelsin 6
vandmelon 4
honningmelon 3

Så man kan ikke konkludere at sødme automatisk betyder at maden er hårdt for blodsukkeret. 

Mange går galt i byen ved at tage tallene fra glykæmisk INDEX, som intet har med blodsukkerpåvirkning at gøre.

Ofte hører man også folk sige, at de kan mærke at deres blodsukker bliver ustabilt hvis de spiser frugt. Men problemet mange oplever med fx frugt handler som oftest om fordøjelsen, frugt fordøjes meget hurtigt og hvis man spiser det ovenpå tungere måltider, så vil man opleve ubehag/træthed. Men det har intet med frugts blodsukkerpåvirkning at gøre.

Så frugt er bedst at spise om morgenen, eller uden at have spist tung mad i løbet af dagen.
-Eller hele dagen, så undgår man helt problemet :)

 
Hvad i kosten bidrager til et ustabilt blodsukker:
*
Raffineret mad, dvs forarbejdet mad, giver nemt problemer.  Det mangler ofte de fibre der findes naturligt. Frugt og anden mad i sin naturlige, hele tilstand har derimod et højt indhold af fibre som sørger for at maden bliver optaget langsomt, og dermed giver en stabil blodsukkerstigning.

*
Højt fedt indholdi kosten. Et højt fedt inhold i blodet gør, at det bliver sværere for sukker at blive transporteret fra blodet, og ud til cellerne som skal bruge det. Det gør at det bliver for længe i blodet, og dermed skaber et ustabilt blodsukker.
Derfor er en fedtfattig kost, og kost der er rig på hele og rå madvarer godt til at holde et stabilt blodsukker.
Max 10% af kalorier fra fedt siges at være optimalt for at stabilt blodsukker.
I standard vestlig kost kommer omkring 30 %-40% af kalorierne fra fedt, og nogle rå kosttyper indeholder op til 70% .





Her er en lille praktisk demonstration der viser at selv store frugtmåltider ikke skaber ustabilt blodsukker:


Dr Grahams forklaring på fedt/sukker/blodsukker:



Skrevet af Cecillia Malou
11/5 2010 


Robby Barbaro - Har diabetes type 1 og lever af frugt og grønt!

Det er en udbredt misforståelse, at diabetikere ikke må få (frugt)sukker. Følg de to links og læs om Robby Barbaro som har diabetes type 1 og lever på 80/10/10. Han rådgiver også folk med diabetes type 2 i hvordan leve bedre med sygdommen og før eller siden blive helt fri for den.

Robby Barbaro: Why A Raw Vegan Diet Is Best For Type 1 Diabetes- Interview med Robby Barbaro

http://robbybarbaro.org/- Robby Barbaros hjemmeside






Skrevet af Micho Andersen 
28/1 2012