"Natural" (plant-based) Health Solutions

Seventeen followed it and had no heart problems for twelve years... If it worked he couldn't very well object. But I'm thinking of someone else doing the study. Improvements over twelve years would not be the result of that sort of surgery in people whose diet was unchanged, or even when the diet was minimally modified. They continue to get plaque buildup. And they would not have been included in the exsperiment if they were actually free of the disease. Yes, because that's the aim of all this dietary treatment and in case after case you see them getting off their meds as the diet frees them of the need for them. It just wasn't specifically mentioned for this experiment.

About watching the various films you say Because I may not be doing the best job of getting across the necessary information.

And how often does that mainstream diet radically change the patient's health for the better? No, Cross specifically benefited from the nutritive value of the foods he was taking in. Sure they "treat" them but they have no expectation of curing them, or even getting them off their meds; and they aren't reporting the radical cures of the totally plant-based regimes. Funny they don't cure anything then while the radical alternative diets do make that claim, based on the nutritional value of the foods and not just isolated beneficial factors or the absence of particular problem foods. The emphasis of all these diets is on the nutritional value of each food. The athletes who are on such diets are maybe the best evidence since they claim actual improvement in their strength and stamina and general performance.ABE: Maybe the most appealing (as well as effective) thing about this whole foods plant based diet is the positive emphasis on foods rather than the emphasis on avoidance. I'm really enjoying the berries and other fruits and the nuts and the potatoes and the big salads with greens and beans and mushrooms and nuts and seeds, and even the oatmeal. And I'm still not really doing the diet yet, far from it. I had an egg salad sandwich for lunch, bread I shouldn't eat, eggs I shouldn't eat, mayo I shouldn't eat. I do love the recommended foods on the WFPB regimes but I have to get better organized so they're available when I 'm too hungry and tired to spend time making a meal.[abe] I did better for dinner. Still not up to much prepping. Had a plate of kidney beans, cooked cold cauliflower, cooked carrots, all flavored with oil and vinegar and garlic powder. Berry smoothie which is a vehicle for my vitamin C and other supplements. Put half and half in it to make a frosty berry shake, otherwise it would have been fine for the diet.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

The films are good, full of information. Some are more investigative than promotional too, such as "What the Health" and "In Defense of Food," and "Food Choices." I'm now watching another one of that type about the food industry, titled "Food Inc." I've learned a lot watching these films.

I read some of the review, but it's too long. And the guy has his own agenda anyway, being a Paleo Diet aficionado.

He also makes a lot of unsubstantiated assertions in a very dismissive tone.Yes, both sides are biased. Your sources are just as bad, and this one is actually worse.Take all the information with a boulder of salt. The films are worth watching.This one I'm still watchingt, "Food, Inc." is pretty depressing. I think we need a culture that encourages farming to become more local again, raising food including animals on a small scale. More private gardens too. We need regulations that stop the money-focused mega industries in their tracks. That's my conclusion from watching the film's coverage of the animal-and-people-abusing methods of agribusiness, as well as how they are bacteria incubators that cause food poisoning breakouts.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Yes, I know I'm bad. But if the opposition is also bad then you can choose between equal positions. I know this is supposed to be a debate site and all that but sometimes I'm more interested in presenting information than debating it, which ought to be allowed on a Coffee House thread. If people are interested they can check it out, otherwise I'm not really inspired to try to make the EvC-certified type of case for it.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Just finished watching "Food, Inc" which is a pretty depressing expose of the food industry. And turns out Republicans have been responsible for a lot of the exploitation and injustice, Clarence Thomas for one and the Bushes for another. The Clintons too, however. The film ends by saying the consumer has a lot of power against all this if we'll exercise it.Buy local
Shop at farmers markets
Buy organic
Buy from companies that respect animals and their workers
Grow your own gardenThing is the huge money-focused companies know how to turn anything good into something questionable in order to keep making money. Monsanto shouldn't own all the soybean seeds in the nation and have the power to force independent farmers to grow only theirs. Etc. Can the consumer make a dent in their power?Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Speaking of growing your own garden I wish I were a lot younger and a lot healthier and lived somewhere that allowed me to do that. I'm so impressed with Annette Larkins who started a garden in her yard in Florida decades ago and gradually started eating exclusively from her garden, eats everything raw too, and though she's at least my age, mid seventies, looks oh maybe 35. Florida being tropical she even grows her own bananas and pineapple as well as everything else that will grow there. She sprouts every kind of seed for extra nutrition. More of us should be living that way.Canadian relatives my family visited when I was a child always had a big backyard garden, just stuffed with good stuff, every kind of green vegetabies, and berries berries berries: SO enticing.

Three clinical trials with different groups, pretty good customer reviews at Amazon, identifiable ingredients with known necessary functions in the body. Doesn't sound like snake oil to me.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I get a lot of help from customer reviews when I'm interested in ordering something from Amazon. When there are a number of similar products to choose from the reviews have often helped me find the best one for my purpose. Customer reviews are likely to be real because you can only post them under your Amazon name, the one you order with, and they show up on your own personal page. And you can only post one review per product. The more reviews the more likely you'll get a trustworthy assessment. I suppose fakes could sign up with a name for the occasion but they'd have to switch computers to do it, and how many products are they likely to shill for anyway?Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

That's not quite what he said. He merely wanted to know why he couldn't just trust Dr. Nicholson about it instead of having to sift through a bunch of studies, and I don't see why not either. Consumers should be able to trust such sources -- at least judge for ourselves whether to trust them.Studies are often complicated and difficult to understand and can also be misleading. PaulK put up a post about such a very complicated study. On something like cellphones causing cancer we could be misled by activists, but we aren't going to wade through all that complex discussion in any case.But Nicholson would have to be a scoundrely iiar to be misleading us about the clinical trials and how much people in the trials wanted to stay on the product after the trial, and the benefits of the supplement. And there's nothing about him or anything he said to suggest he is a scoundrely liar.And most of us DO read reviews at Amazon and elsewhere to help us make up our minds about a product. You'll find plenty of negative as well as positive views there.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

No, I don't believe in leprechauns, which you must know if you'd read what I wrote about all that honestly. I refer to Jacques Vallee's conclusions that UFOs are not ETs but some kind of spiritual phenomena, a conclusion he came to after studying accounts of UFOs and realizing they had a lot in common with folklore tales of such things as leprechauns and fairies and spooky occurrences down the centuries.He's not a Christian so he came up with some explanation for another dimension in which these beings can appear in various forms, but since I'm a Christian I accept the reality of demons, or fallen angels, and their ability to manifest in various forms for the purpose of dominating and deceiving human beings. Leprechauns are one possible way they may have manifested to people before the industrial age. After that they appeared as engines of various sorts and now as UFOs. If you consider yourself to be a Christian but don't believe demons and angels are real, it's you whose judgment is false.Besides, why would a belief in anything supernatural preclude making reasonable judgments about human character? Truly there is something wrong with your thinking.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Jacques Vallee is a respected expert on UFO phenomena. I didn't make it up.Besides, dismissing my opinions because of what you think I believe in is a pretty nasty ad hominem. Who are you to judge another person that way? You must think your own opinions are some kind of unimpeachable standard. I've often thought you are one of the most cockeyed posters here.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

My method is no different than anybody's method, and you are way out of line to smear me based on your own lack of belief in the Bible, especially since none of that has one thing to do with this subject. You are WAY out of line and should apologize..Edited by Faith, : No reason given.