Enzymes, Crudités and Pancreas or Pancreas

[Janic]

Obamot hello

Bein if his age and / or his metabolism is forced!

Yes and no at the same time. One mixes fatigue of the organism, following the accumulation of errors over a lifetime, and sudden rupture to change one's lifestyle or food.

- one who is diabetic, for example! Explain to him how he can remove starch from potatoes without cooking them!

By simply no longer consuming it.

- there are also allergy sufferers. And for them, it is not discussed. You can say that eating raw would eventually stop having these allergies. In the meantime, people have to eat!

Hence the gradual transition from one mode to another. Still it should not be considered that the possible difficulty of this passage is a justification not to do so. Dr. Paul Carton, one of the lighthouses of natural dietetics in France, classified foods with high, medium and low heat according to the digestive tolerances of the patients and their age.

- some are going to bait with raw cereals, others not (but they are rather rare)!

Hence the usefulness of fasting to give the body time to breathe and find its bearings distorted by years of errors

- moreover, it is not very advisable to eat cold in winter (it goes back a long way to humans eating "hot" ...)

Again, this is only true through food diversification and the use of fridges. Winter food availability is reduced and most of the food consumed is eaten at room temperature, therefore between 15 and 25 ° so the cold in question is very relative. The passage in the mouth and prolonged chewing warms the absorbed food. Cooking is especially necessary for meats that few are able to consume raw without a knife or fork.

- cooking does not only have negative aspects, it ALSO allows toxins to be removed from food,

If a food is toxic, it is better not to consume it: but what are you thinking about?

- I do not see very well how or could eat raw potatoes! And it would be a shame not to eat it, since it is an excellent deacidifier! Ditto for zucchini (it's not great, raw!), Turnips, or even pumpkin.

Again this is linked to food consumption which does not necessarily correspond to the biological and instinctive mechanisms which are determined by the anatomy and the development (or its perversion) of taste. And the search for deacidifier can only be to compensate for consumption non-physiological acidifying foods

- and again, it's a question of TASTE damn it!

Exactly ! But what is taste when it has been perverted for centuries depending on food cultures. The cat, the dog, the snake, the insects, are considered with disgust in our food culture, while the taste has nothing to do with it.

- what distorts cooked food is mainly the rise and fall in temperature. So briefly scalded foods lose almost nothing (ditto for steaming or woke!) Proof is that even vitamin C is preserved with a good cooking method!

Another dietary error linked to culture and habits. What is the function of cooking? Soften the food so that it becomes consumable while in its natural form, it would not be consumed because of its hardness (therefore unsuitable for natural tools such as hands, teeth, opening the jaw, etc. …) And above all, the most serious, allows to consume a much greater quantity than if it had been consumed raw and therefore for a disastrous final balance.

- finally, last but not least, biochemistry teaches us that there are active principles which are released when hot, and others when cold (as we note in certain infusions, that we must drink either hot or cold).

There too, we want to tune into our habits, our mores, whereas we have to do the opposite if we want to reduce the effects and consequences of our bad habits. (which I recognize, I still have quite a few!)

So I would say in summary: you have to trust your taste, and you have to do a little of both, if you want to take advantage of all the active ingredients!

This is called self-justification! but this can diminish over time and experience.

On the other hand, where I would completely agree with a point that you raised recently, it is that one should not make a too sophisticated food bowl and stuffed with heavy sauces to digest. The ideal is not even any sauce at all: steam cooking (or seared in a woke), then the food served with just a drizzle of olive oil and a little salt / condiments, but nothing more! And it's a delight!

Hence this "delicious" extract from:

Alexandra David Neel in her work Le Voyage d'une parisienne à Lhassa quotes this anecdote:
" Oh ! A terrible smell suddenly fills the room, a hint of charnel house, it's excruciating ... the Tibetans have the awful habit when they kill an animal to lock up in the stomach, the kidneys, the heart, the liver and the entrails of the animal; they then sew this sort of bag and its contents macerate there for days for weeks, or even more ... The mother armed herself with a cleaver and cut the carrion into pieces; from time to time one of these escapes him and falls on the floor, the children then rush like young dogs and devour him raw… the others feast greedily, in silence, all to the joy of this bombance ” Other places, other customs. But this is nothing more disgusting than the Caen-style tripe, raw swallowed oysters, kidneys in Madeira sauce and cooked meats or other stinky cheeses from our beautiful country of gastronomy.

hello hello,

I would complete by quoting the "ancestral" diet so named by Doctor Seignalet. Diet based on raw food for the most part and for what is cooked, it recommends a so-called gentle cooking (less than 100 ° c) therefore with gentle steam ....

Excellent book which however sins, too, by preserving the idea that the individual is omnivorous and if he gives excellent indications (which is noticed by the concretization that food selection has consequences on all pathologies) , it remains very classic on other points. Nobody is perfect !

I just notice that more and more people are becoming gluten intolerant ... *

There is a saying that " when you want to kill your dog, you say he has rabies »The intolerances noted are not indicative of the type of cereals absorbed (it is not a question here of determining whether the cereals are good or not, but just the possible reasons for these intolerances).
A food, to be of maximum benefit must first be raw (hence the germinated seeds which allow to pass certain contradictions), then complete, of good quality (organic), finally not mixed with other foods including digestion differs in its acidic or basic composition. These intolerances are therefore linked to mechanisms distorted by physiologically non-conforming eating habits. In case of allergy, it is not the gluten that must be removed but the food itself, temporarily or permanently.

Personally, I still occasionally consume eggs, and fish but more meat, especially red, I feel good and I take on my work day without any cost of fatigue that I had before during a carnivorous meal ... .

So much the better for you and if you continue on this path you will see that with each passage towards an entirely vegetable consumption of quality (organic), the successive improvements will be felt because it is not necessary to think only of the present moment, but of the future with the passing years and where our "past mistakes" are felt with more or less acuity.

[Obamot]

There I am disappointed, I thought that the debate had at least evolved on a few points!

Bein if his age and / or his metabolism is forced!

Yes and no at the same time. We mix fatigue of the organism, following the accumulation of errors over a lifetime,

Ah yes, and it is you who will tell us, what is an error of what is not?

You who will be able to tell us how to get around the "personal will"With such a message without nuances?

We wonder how you are going to do it, without the prerequisites that would avoid you repeating the same pedagogical nonsense ...?

With what you said, you would already have at least China, or even the whole of Asia against you: they drink moderately hot drinks all day long (like tea or sometimes just water: which means above 25 ° C) have been cooking with steam or woke for millennia, etc.

Arf Janic, Janic .... we like him, but there are times when he doesn't go with the back of the spoon! And if we didn't know him, we would feel the mystagogue pointing! What am I saying, the hierogrammate see the victim in such a speech [joke OFF]

Besides, when a simple question of biochemistry is pitted against him and he dries up miserably, how can he still be so assertive after that, when himself "Don't know certain things ...!"

et brutal rupture to change lifestyle or food.

- one who is diabetic, for example! Explain to him how he can remove starch from potatoes without cooking them!

By simply no longer consuming it.

Yes then there indeed, it is the rupture! ° _O And in his doctrine, the pleasure of others: what does Mr. Janic do with it?

Is he the one who decides?

Here is the breakdown of the word stock I will not answer the rest, because if theoretically Janic is sometimes right. He continues with his injunctions which are impractical in practice, because they are unrealistic and sometimes very false when it comes to set the right priorities, And that's a shame. And especially considering the flexibility of mind that any food reform suggests: it seems useless to add tons!

Just like what he says about Dr Seignalet (I don't see how we could still criticize him, except that it is already almost strict, but much more COMPLETE than strict VG, and that any doctrine taught which would claim to be as restrictive is a matter of food would by definition be in total error (we see it with the string of objections which precedes ): in short since we unlock too much with free will, I no longer answer in a thread.

At least Dr. Seignalet knew just like Kousmine (and even if it must be followed literally as a practitioner of orthomolecular medicine) to set the GOOD PRIORITIES!

[Janic]

Obamot

Ah yes, and it is you who will tell us, what is an error of what is not?

It is not my role! For those interested, there is an abundant literature on these subjects, but THE difficulty, indeed, is when one considers such a thing as an error and the other not: who to believe?

With what you said, you would already have at least China, or even the whole of Asia against you: they drink moderately hot drinks all day long (like tea or sometimes just water: which means above 25 ° C) have been cooking with steam or woke for millennia, etc.

It is what one calls cultures and habits (like that quoted from david-Neil and it is probable that this culture can be millenary too !?). LA science, which we pride ourselves on, is also advancing in these fields which may be considered as minor by some or important for others. So some habits are less annoying than others, but physiologically we are designed for or not. After everyone does what they want with it!

Arf Janic, Janic .... we like him, but there are times when he doesn't go with the back of the spoon! And if we didn't know him, we would feel the mystagogue pointing! What do I say, the hierogrammate or even the victim in such a speech [joke OFF]

no luck, I don't match any! There is no mystery, no dogmatism, no religiosity, what I write is at the disposal of those who seek, it is still necessary to seek it!

Furthermore, when a simple question of biochemistry is opposed to him and he dries up miserably, how can he still be so assertive after that, when himself "does not know certain things ...!"

There yes, I miserably dry in chemistry and since I'm an ignoramus, I let the professionals express themselves, but also and especially the experience, the lived. Chemistry like the rest does not invent biological processes and only discovers them after millennia of experimentation and as the learned august Lumière said: " unique source of truth experience »

Janic wrote:

Obamot wrote:
- one who is diabetic, for example! Explain to him how he can remove starch from potatoes without cooking them!

By simply no longer consuming it.

Yes then there indeed, it is the rupture! ° _O And in his doctrine, the pleasure of others: what does Mr. Janic do with it?

The pleasure of others is not my business! If people place their pleasure (including me!) Above their health, even their life, it is everyone's responsibility. If the potatoes do not ME not suitable for medical reasons, I would simply abstain; there are a multitude of other nutritious and tasty foods! (NB: I eat potatoes once or twice a month, that's the maximum)

Here it is the rupture of the stock of words I will not answer the rest, because if theoretically Janic is sometimes right. He continues with his injunctions that are impracticable in practice, because they are unrealistic and sometimes very false when it comes to setting the right priorities, and that's a shame. And especially considering the flexibility of mind that any food reform suggests: it seems useless to add tons!

The right priorities are not the same for everyone. For those who are hungry, any food will do the trick: organic or not, refined or not, chemical or not, to survive is SA priority. Whoever is on the verge of death, SA priority is to survive and not to be reassured by promises that in 10 years we will have found the solution to our problem. LA the only priority is to live and for some to survive, the rest is just philosophy.

Just like what he says about Dr Seignalet (I don't see how we could still criticize him, except that it is already almost strict, but much more COMPLETE than strict VG, and that any doctrine taught that would claim to be as restrictive is a matter of food would by definition be in total error (we see it with the string of objections that precedes): in short since we unlock too much with free will, I no longer respond in a thread.

Seignalet makes according to his priorities and his current knowledge, as well as his therapeutic choices (like other doctors in other fields). If his 3 ° medicine was already applied, there would be a number of reduced pathologies, it is obvious, but his proposals integrate a certain number of dietetic parameters and neglects others, this is what I wanted to mention. As a reminder, if he recommends a mostly raw and gluten-free diet and that pathologies disappear for the most part with some inevitable failures (like any therapy), the majority of these failures are linked to the abandonment of these dietary rules as there There will be failures in VG when the main rules have not been understood because they are too restrictive as with all things.
That said, this does not hinder free will since everyone can do or not do what could be favorable to him, if only because the "natural" methods are mainly advised by non-doctors (most of between them not being trained for that). It is also their advantage not to follow people refusing any reform when the doctor is in the obligation of care.

At least Dr. Seignalet knew just like Kousmine (and even if it must be followed literally as a practitioner of orthomolecular medicine) to set the GOOD PRIORITIES!

No, he fixed what HIM seemed a priority, it's completely different! But other approaches would have given similar results and verified, there too, by experience and experience!

We certainly have similar points on some points and others on differences, this is normal because being the result of different paths. It is therefore good for everyone to be able to express their point of view and the reader to make their choice ... or to be indifferent to it, moreover, we don't have to feel responsible for everyone's choices! To inform is not to reform!

[Obamot]

Ah yes, and it is you who will tell us, what is an error of what is not?

It is not my role!

It's always the same refrain. Well, I stand by everything I said!

who to believe

Why do you doubt?

physiologically we are designed for or not.

Arf, you are very clumsy to catch up after monumental blunders. Because in general, follows another blunder! There you are doing strong! The mechanism of digestion (by fermentation) is really very flexible, so we should stop focusing this debate! When I speak of "priorities", these are big general evidences that can apply to everyone (for simplicity).

what I write is at the disposal of those who seek, it is still necessary to seek it!

This time maybe we shouldn't look too much amha

The pleasure of others is not my business!

Yes, well we understood that, and then you would like to talk to us about "psychology"

So we are the opposite, because it is a data that we must worry about: no, but!

Honestly, with the blow of the potato that we should stop eating cooked we do not know why (and because inedible, even possibly toxic raw ...), there you have reached heights!

The right priorities are not the same for everyone.

Did you guess that on your own? So why do you argue that you have to do without eating potatoes, if you admit that the priorities are not the same for everyone? Do you see the contradictions in your speech?

Seignalet does according to its priorities and its current knowledge,

So then, if you admit that it can evolve with all the knowledge, how can you say that the potatoes are contraindicated, since you do not even have the knowledge of chemistry to certify your assertions!

If his 3rd medicine [from Dr Seignalet] was already applied, there would be a number of reduced pathologies, it is obvious, but his proposals integrate a certain number of dietary parameters and neglects others,

Arf, is it the opposite!?!? And in relation to what? Has the metabolism of the human body changed since then? (I'm not asking you to answer, huh ...)

As a reminder, if he recommends a mostly raw and gluten-free diet and that pathologies disappear for the most part with some inevitable failures (like any therapy), the majority of these failures are linked to the abandonment of these dietary rules

Stop a bit, you support everything and its opposite! Gluten-related questions relate almost exclusively to very rare cases. Who when they are restored, do not make more problems! In short, questions of priorities that are poorly understood. Besides, I am not defending this doctor - although he has done a remarkable job - since I believe that it is already going too far for many of us. It is not necessary and sometimes counterproductive (It is a double-edged sword this story, without any offense whatsoever: as long as you do not understand the cognitive-behavioral approach - or do not estimate it at its true value - you n 'will not get there amha ... It will always be the BIG mix).

It seems to me that in general, your syllabus is much better than that! I think I'll forget this episode!

[bidouille23]

bonsoir,

personally the answers of janic suit me, all having different metabolism, how to make a strict and simple rule without being simplistic in the end?

If we summarize it is good by taking small steps that we tighten personal, and learning that will be just as much, because by dint of small step and learning and testing, it is ourselves that we will discover, and this makes our own diet.

The basics on the main line when it seems still exposed, it may be they that should simply be recalled (I'm going to need help;)).

I would say (but I feel like I'm going to write nonsense):

* Raw is often better than cooked
* eating animals is absolutely not an obligation to live
* gentle steam is less destructive than cooking at high temperature
* Avoid as much as you can eat oxidized food
* Control your sugar consumption (simple sugar I hear)
* And above all change your own vision of food, and not necessarily put pleasure in the foreground (or at least put the notion of pleasure in a space more respectful of ourselves)

I forget a lot of things including a lot that I simply do not know (if I can also say that I know others;), have often believe to know until the moment or we learn that we know nothing about done if not nonsense;)) ...

Janic, I am very happy in this way thank you, and this is only the beginning, little by little I think to progress and to be in agreement with my "double" if one can say;), in order to really master my own person ... at the moment I am no longer materialized in me the envies triggered by my sympathetic system (which is not the time in view of the abuses that he orders us despite ourselves to do) .. . and it is not simple arff we are not very much ...

Small correction for the Tibetans, in the book "the third eye" written by an exiled Tibetan inhabitant, he explains that he actually eats meat, but in no case the meat of an animal that he has kill . Only meat from dead animals and picked up as such, they live in a freezer let's not forget;) ... The habits as you say are even more different and this book is not bad at all to put our world Vision ....
A small example for the babies, they are immersed in the icy water of a river until the base of the blow (maybe still the current time I don't know) and it comes out blue, there are two solutions: the child lives or dies not .. nothing monstrous in there quite the contrary, considering the harsh climate very harsh, if the child lives he will be resistant, otherwise let a weak child live in a harsh world will not bring him that suffering throughout his life .... it is a form of respect in the end that it is not, I agree, necessarily easy to understand or accept, and yet ...

[Janic]

hack hello
your synthesis is good! And it is better to move slowly but surely than to rush and reverse. for the consumption of meat in Tibet, animal fat is almost the only available source of lipids. We must therefore place ourselves in the right context each time. While in our temperate countries, the sources of vegetable lipids are abundant and without the disadvantages of animal fats.

[Obamot]

hack hello
your synthesis is good!

interesting that you know better than the specialists on the subject, to make a judgment!

better to move slowly but surely than to rush and reverse.

Above all, it would be advisable to move FROM THE FACE in the right direction, which would avoid the second scenario.

for the consumption of meat in Tibet, animal fat is almost the only available source of lipids. We must therefore place ourselves in the right context each time.

Yet this is what you keep telling yourself! Funny words from a strict VG, most of the time so much riding on his doctrine!

Fun that you take it back to your account! Using the same logic: you know, a mother often has a harder head than any of the Inuit

While in our temperate countries, the sources of vegetable lipids are abundant and without the disadvantages of animal fats.

Basically, contrary to what you possibly try to make believe here, and without any offense: in general you apply your reasonings in a selective way, according to your own prerogatives (although I note the exception above). And not according to the needs, nor the tastes and / or the priorities of everyone, this is what is wrong (and which leads to nonsense when one does almost only reason exclusively in the absolute). Besides, it is not even relevant, what good is it to advocate a doctrine which has very little chance of being followed in the long term in the end! And not even directly the interested parties themselves (that's the concern)!

So much the better if some do and persevere, but they will have to do it alone. At least they are warned of all the restrictions they will have to face, and that it is not easy to "stay in the nails" once it is based on a dogma, because ideologies are made. always catch up with the reality on the ground. And what is the field? It is often - in the event of a strict diet - to isolate oneself socially, which is not really a solution and a source of many potential conflicts (in his close entourage).

Unfortunately, that got us off the topic of Hic, which was his question about enzymes and that your big gap didn't help to clarify.

A last one before we go:

At least Dr. Seignalet knew just like Kousmine (and even if it must be followed literally as a practitioner of orthomolecular medicine) to set the GOOD PRIORITIES!

No, he fixed what HIM seemed a priority, it's completely different!

Absolutely not. It is the whole purpose of orthomolecular medicine, to take stock of what enters and leaves the body.
So it was not "him" but "what the observations were saying" in the field (which he did at length, as well as Kousmine by confirming this by experiments / tests carried out on mice).

The only interest of a flexible form of veganism is that it allows to pass - in the case of consumption of excess meat - from a mode of digestion by putrefaction, to a diet by fermentation! No one therefore needs to do without animal products completely (in the "absolute", since you like to think in these terms so much)!

Besides still in the "absolute", the gastric juice adapts permanently its formula according to the food ingested! And the pancreas likewise by releasing the ad hoc enzymes! The human body did not wait for Janic to tell him what to do!

[bidouille23]

Bonjour,

Janic two hundred percent agreements with you, I will make a parallel with the renovation of a home, each case is unique as much from the construction system according to the regions as at the level of the finances of the owner, and final objectives to be achieved, in the south or in the north the need for insulation will not be the same for example .... And wanting to do everything in a hurry in a renovation often comes back to making a cumulative error which forces undo what has just been done, going back is even more complicated ....;) it's the craftsman who talks , and somewhere we are all craftsmen of our own body without being able to be that of the neighbor's body.

[Janic]

No, he fixed what seemed to HIM priority, it's completely different!

Absolutely not. It is the whole purpose of orthomolecular medicine, to take stock of what enters and leaves the body.
So it was not "him" but "what the observations said" in the field (which he did for a long time, as did Kousmine, confirming this by experiments / tests carried out on mice).

And VG is directly experienced by humans because no one is ignorant of the fact that tests on mice or other guinea pigs are not applicable to humans, nor vice versa. (already only human to human, it doesn't necessarily work)

The only interest of a flexible form of veganism is that it allows to pass - in the case of consumption of excess meat - from a mode of digestion by putrefaction, to a diet by fermentation! No one therefore needs to do without animal products completely (in the "absolute", since you like to think in these terms so much)!

It's always the same thing, you reason outside of personal experience, or comparison with the real ones experimenters. But I grant you that a reduction of ANY physiologically unsuitable product will generally result in better well-being.

Besides still in the "absolute", the gastric juice adapts permanently its formula according to the food ingested! And the pancreas likewise by releasing the ad hoc enzymes!

This is obvious, but what is not taken into account here is the general economy in expenditure of digestive energy and especially assimilation, if it were otherwise any excess or supposed such, would pass without difficulty; hence the problems that diabetics face.

The human body did not wait for Janic to tell him what to do!

Fortunately, but he did not wait for orthomolecular medicine (whatever its interest) either. However, this medicine, like all those relating to hygienism, seeks to understand the mechanisms (oh how complex) of life. Kousmine as Seignalet have brought, like their predecessors, their stone to the building with the limits they have given themselves (your priorities) but do not represent the building itself and this building is the living in real situation .

[Obamot]

It's always the same thing, you reason outside of personal experience, or comparison with the real ones experimenters.

What does Janic know about my experiences, which have been going on for over 30 years first?

I grant you that a reduction of ANY physiologically unsuitable product will generally result in better well-being.

Not the drugs! It can even lead to the subject's death! This is what Janic's reasoning leads to, sometimes "absolutist" when it suits him, sometimes expressing a certain flexibility, when he does not want to give an overly fundamentalist image of his ideological struggle! Whereas with an ethical line and only one, it would be enough to stick to it without constantly facing perpetual contradictions. That's the ethical idea ...

No, he fixed what seemed to HIM priority, it's completely different!

Absolutely not. It is the whole purpose of orthomolecular medicine [all] to take stock of what enters and leaves the organism.

So it was not "him" but "what the observations said" in the field (which he did for a long time, as did Kousmine, confirming this by experiments / tests carried out on mice).

And VG is directly experienced by humans because no one is ignorant of the fact that tests on mice or other guinea pigs are not applicable to humans, nor vice versa. (already only human to human, it doesn't necessarily work)

In any case, it worked for me, and all the patients in question!

And this is false, because if Janic is a good friend of the dogma that feeds his thoughts, he cannot deny:
- that even mice have enzymes to digest (he can also check this with a dog and any mammal, just like us).
- they have an immune system, just like us;
- that they develop pathologies when they are subjected to stress (if Janic disputes, that he studies Henri Laborit a little better), just like us
- that by the way even mice defecate (Janic hadn't noticed, is it just like us?);
- that from then on, Janic could very well experience it himself, taking stock - what comes in and out - just like us and it would achieve the same result, wouldn't it ...
- that if we inject them with poison, there comes a time when, just like us, they reach their lethal dose ...
- that if Janic fed his mice badly, he could see that they too develop cancers, and that as soon as he re-establishes a correct food bowl, said tumors disappear, just like us!
- that as soon as they had tumors, we would find the poison in the infected cells, just like us!
- that Janic could then observe an increase in life expectancy between cancer mice VS healthy mice (just like us);
- that when they eat potatoes, their acid-base balance is restored ...
- and therefore that he could deduce that it would not be excluded that a 100% VG diet would involve a non-negligible risk of lowering his life expectancy!
etc.

Disturbing! It's not "relevant»According to Janic ... Except that he doesn't mind, it works!

So the next time Janic wants to challenge the facts (which he admits when it suits him, we don't quite understand why) that he tries to take better examples . And provide links to solid studies. Because there, it no longer holds water.