Carrot juice: vegetarian diet increases risk of cancer and heart disease

[Obamot]

Of course for sea salt I was talking about "unrefined" or gray.

I have not found how to replace the cottage cheese 0% for an emulsion with canola oil!

? Bizarre! The oils in general are comparable regardless of any support. Replaces the cheese with a lemon sauce.

The emulsion was Dr. Kousmine's thing in his protective diet for the liver. You can safely absorb linseed oil like that (1 tbsp) if not hepatotoxic (besides prohibited for sale in France it is found only in some foreign countries such as Biolin). Lemon it mixes with, but precisely if there is emulsion (otherwise it is not miscible amha)

[Did67]

Small question on sea ​​salt (even if I have my idea): we keep repeating that we should not salt the salad, that it would destroy something?

We say a lot of things.

For what I know (agronomy and gardening), I can just say he says ... mountains of bullshit!

I tend to think that it's the same for topics I do not know. It does not give me the solution. But do not believe me as an idiot what they say ...

Salt, I'm just trying to reduce it to a few things. Before I reconnected tonight, planting my garlic this afternoon, I remembered that I had forgotten that. Sometimes, in a certain number of dishes, we forget it. In homemade bread, I put a teaspoon for a loaf of 1 kg [unsalted bread, there, tastefully, I calle].

Salt is a poison. But it's hard to do without it. Especially as an agent of palatability (we do not need it anymore as a preservative nowadays)

Always remember that the DL50 salt is 3 g / kg. That of paracetamol of 2,4 g / kg or that of glyphosate (the active ingredient of Roundup) of ... 2 g / kg. Admittedly, the DL 50 is a very approximate indicator of immediate toxicity. So questionable. But the Roundup barely more toxic than salt, is not to absolve the Roundup that I say that. But to accuse salt!

I reduce the dosage of salt, but I can not live without it!

For the rest, salt salad or not, no info / no opinion.

[Did67]

Sorry, but this is an example of cultural self-justification precisely.
Could we say that rational predation is a herbivore and leads to a biological balance? Obviously not, since these animals are not biologically / anatomically suited to this type of predation. We either, but human society is not an ideal example of respect for these biological rules.

I suspected that you would not agree and that you would react.

It seems to me established that man has been a hunter - gatherer since at least the times of Cro-Magnon ... Of course, that depends on the environment in which he was. And the "diet" of men should not be the same in tropical zones or in temperate zones. I am not talking about the Inuit, or the Indians of the plains, who undoubtedly have a hard time being vegetarians and yet are civilizations.

But it is not abnormal to have contrary opinions!

[Did67]

You can safely absorb linseed oil like that (1 tbsp) if not hepatotoxic (besides prohibited for sale in France it is found only in some foreign countries such as Biolin).

I think that the AFSSA has revised its position and that the sale is allowed now (I buy it in Germany, but in reality, I prefer to supplement with ground flax). The so-called toxicity would not be proved ... and was related to the treatments during the extraction with high temperature ...

But I make a moderate consumption all the same.

[Did67]

On the subject itself, as it appears in the title, this article on the site of the newspaper Le Monde tonight:


No, the vegetarian diet does not promote cancer
THE WORLD | 13.04.2016 to 12h21 • Updated 13.04.2016 to 15h50 | By Adrien Sénécat

Anglo-Saxon and French media have published articles in recent days warning of the "dangers" of the vegetarian diet. According to these articles, depriving oneself of meat would increase the risks of cancer and heart disease.
"A long-term vegetarian diet changes human DNA and increases the risk of cancer and heart disease," says The Telegraph. "A US study warns about the dangers of the long-term vegetarian diet," adds Europe 1. "In the long run, the vegetarian diet increases the risk of cancer and heart disease," reads again in Les Echos.

WHY IT IS WRONG

These titles are actually at best inaccurate, at worst wrong, as noted by Vice. "At first, we were happy that our research aroused such interest," says Kaixiong Ye, one of the authors of the study. But in recent days, I realized that most articles about our study were fake. It's pretty frustrating. "
Because the purpose of this work, available on the site of the University of Oxford, is not to compare the advantages and disadvantages of a vegetarian diet. The researchers are actually interested in different variants (alleles) of a gene called FADS 2, which is involved in the metabolism of fatty acids.
The results of the study actually show that according to the version of this gene that an individual possesses, the most suitable diet is not the same. For example, one of the alleles causes the body to metabolize omega-3 and omega-6, two long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids that contribute to brain development and have anti-inflammatory properties.
Owning this version of the gene would be an advantage for populations that have a vegetarian or vegan diet (without any animal protein, including eggs and milk for example). "Vegans depend almost exclusively on endogenous synthesis to produce long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids," the authors note. This means that their diet contains less initially, but their body allows them to compensate.
An adaptation to the environment
However, researchers have found that individuals with twice this allele in significantly higher proportions in South Asia (70%), Africa (53%) or East Asia (29%) than 'in Europe (17%). That is to say, this "vegetarian" allele is more common in countries with a vegetarian tradition (or low meat consumption) than in Western countries, where the "classic" version of the gene is the majority.
And they discovered an allele to the opposite effect among Inuit in Greenland, which would be adapted to their high consumption of fish.
So there could be a form of natural selection in these results, according to the researchers. "It is possible that in the history of human evolution, when populations migrated in different environments, sometimes they followed a vegetarian diet, sometimes a diet based on fish and that according to the times, the different alleles of the gene were adapted "to the environment, analyzes Kaixiong Ye on the Cornell site.
Warning: this does not mean that diet directly "modifies" genes, as we have read in some articles.
No general lessons on vegetarian diet and cancer risks
If some media have talked about the risks of vegetarian diets, it is because having twice the "vegetarian" allele also has its share of potential disadvantages. Those who own it and "deviate" from their ancestors' eating habits (such as eating lots of meat and fish or some vegetable oils) are more prone to inflammation and have higher risks of heart disease or colon cancer.
But these observations are not used by the authors to say that one or another diet would be more appropriate than another in the absolute. And even less to point out the dangers of vegetarian eating in itself.
"One of the implications of our study is that we can use this genetic information to adjust our diet, so that it is adapted to our genome," says Kaixiong Ye. This is called personalized nutrition. "
Adrien Sénécat

Learn more about http://www.lemonde.fr/les-decodeurs/art ... 7DxJmYZ.99


There, I begin to find myself !!!

[Obamot]

Well, you doubted your very first post and I said that entry (but others could also say):
Health-pollution-prevention / the-diet-vegetarian-increases-would-the-risk-of-cancer-and-heart-disease-t14669.html # p301787

[Janic]

DID hello

I suspected that you would not agree and that you would react.

This is my reactionary side that manifested itself! For decades I have heard these words, and many others, that appear as mantras that everyone repeats to self-persuade to be right, while a choice does not need to be.

It seems to me that the man has been a hunter-gatherer since at least the times of Cro-Magnon ...

« For what I know, I can just say he says ... mountains of bullshit!
I tend to think that it's the same for topics I do not know. It does not give me the solution. But do not believe me as an idiot what they say ... »
I will nuance this speech!
a) All, WITHOUT EXCEPTION, we self justify for everything and anything, a priori, to preserve our beliefs (or skull stuffing obviously)
b) For the hunter-gatherer (or rather gatherer-hunter because the historical and biological order is important) it is an indisputable reality that we find in some monkeys (biologically closest to us), but has it always been so? (this point alone would require development!)
c) The question, which concerns us, goes beyond this previous framework to see what is currently happening where, thanks also to the scientific knowledge that we have of it, the fact of consuming animal products is more a culture than a need real physiological conditions and the well conducted VG, shows that this animal consumption presents more disadvantages than advantages (except for the sector which produces it!)

Of course, it really depends on the environment he was in. And the "diet" of men should not be the same in tropical zones or in temperate zones. I am not talking about the Inuit, or the Indians of the plains, who undoubtedly have a hard time being vegetarians and yet are civilizations.

It's just ! The question is why some civilizations were placed in these extreme conditions not favorable to survival. As " There's nothing new under the sun The weaker ones are often rejected far from the dominant ones and have to be satisfied with the crumbs of these. This situation is perpetuated and the descendants, who have adapted to the situation, ratify it and this gives rise to a specific "civilization".
However, this does not change the major biological rules that have been recognized in anatomo-biology: no particular transformation of the major mechanisms of body functioning where we can compare fossils with our contemporaries and where does not appear no particular modification (it does not correspond to the discourse on adaptive evolution taught ... « mountains of bullshit " in question !)

But it is not abnormal to have contrary opinions!

It is even these differences of opinion that are interesting. If ecology had the same discourse as the instituted systems, it would have nothing to say and even would not exist. These differences must be considered as whirlwinds (it is in the air) designed to improve certain situations and avoid, or even limit, much suffering and death.
Now I do not judge anyone, a change, as slight as it is, requires a lot of courage (and individual efforts) to question a certain type of society and its modes of consumption.
But the reward is at the end and is verified by a better being (as for a sports discipline for example).

Otherwise the corrective article shows how to be careful with misdirected ad effects. Indeed the VGR and more VGL are used to fight against these cancerizations but with really healthy products ... more than bio!

[Obamot]

Janic hello, some remarks in your direction:

DID hello

I suspected that you would not agree and that you would react.

This is my reactionary side that manifested itself! For decades I have heard these words, and many others, that appear as mantras that everyone repeats to self-persuade to be right, while a choice does not need to be.

It seems to me that the man has been a hunter-gatherer since at least the times of Cro-Magnon ...

« For what I know, I can just say he says ... mountains of bullshit!
I tend to think that it's the same for topics I do not know. It does not give me the solution. But do not believe me as an idiot what they say ... »
I will nuance this speech!
a) All, WITHOUT EXCEPTION, we self justify for everything and anything, a priori, to preserve our beliefs (or skull stuffing obviously)
b) For the hunter-gatherer (or rather gatherer-hunter because the historical and biological order is important) it is an indisputable reality that we find in some monkeys (biologically closest to us), but has it always been so?

The study of coprolites shows that we were fruitful at first, with an intestine much longer than large predators, and which is necessary to assimilate plants (as regards anatomo-biology, you can just as much return the argument from "evolutionary discourse" as follows: "we cannot at the same time be for Darwin when it comes to proving the theory of evolution and no longer apply it when obviously morphological differences are evident in the" rather non-predators "that we are".)

► View Text

I am not taking sides with the theory of evolution, although ...

Click to enlarge:

c) The question, which concerns us, goes beyond this previous framework to see what is currently happening where, thanks also to the scientific knowledge that we have of it, the fact of consuming animal products is more a culture than a need real physiological conditions and the well conducted VG, shows that this animal consumption presents more disadvantages than advantages (except for the sector which produces it!)

Anyway, I always had a curious feeling when I ate red meat (I mean a weird feeling, a kind of repulsion, even if I liked at a distant time: grills) since the announcement of WHO is a relief, I felt that eating this meat was unnatural, as if there was a prion hiding behind every bite of meat (I mean the bad feeling that meat was producing in the mouth, notwithstanding the juices released). That's to say if I'm happy to no longer eat (because say the WHO has declared that as a carcinogen is a strong argument against the entourage! that it is sometimes difficult to discipline with the time, there can be relaxation ...)
So it's good that you were right to hammer this. Moreover, it is demonstrated by the cohort of pathologies that to stop consuming meat products (or to strongly reduce their consumption so as not to go directly from an excess to a counterproductive deprivation on the cognitive-behavioral level) therefore to cease as soon as possible, can only be beneficial to help restore health (this is now indisputable.)

It's just ! The question is why some civilizations were placed in these extreme conditions not favorable to survival. As " There's nothing new under the sun The weaker ones are often rejected far from the dominant ones and have to be satisfied with the crumbs of these. This situation is perpetuated and the descendants, who have adapted to the situation, ratify it and this gives rise to a specific "civilization".

The ironic side is that it is the "dominant haves" who have sometimes adopted the worst habits and behaviors.

► View Text

often? yes, compared to purchasing power and the incredible list of pathologies that cover more than 80% of diseases

white bread instead of black bread, gargantuan meals with lots of fat and meat, desserts for all meals, cakes with tea / coffee at 16h00 ... and nowadays sodas all day long - even with doctors whose some smoke like firemen for! Smoking in the medical profession is a real problem! (Paradox quite symptomatic of a form of rejection of the doctrine inculcated?)

[Did67]

Go, another element of debate from the website of the newspaper Le Monde:

Being vegan and great sportsman is possible?
THE WORLD | 14.04.2016 to 12h01 |
By Aurélie Sipos


The meat symbol of strength? For a long time this cliché has the hard life, and especially in the middle of sport. For good performance, the consumption of animal protein has always been part of the diets of athletes. Yet, some combine vegan diet and high-level sport practice.

Flavien Bascoul prepares his marathon stride by stride. Like any runner, he trains rigorously and follows a balanced diet. With a peculiarity: the young man of 29 years is vegan. In his sports plates, no animal protein or products derived from the exploitation of animals.

"In 2011, in the subway, I saw an article on the Paris marathon. I thought it was something to do at least once in his life, "says Flavien. But the story does not stop there and the young man is passionate about running. It even lengthens distances and participates in ultramarathons from 50 to 100 kilometers. "Right now I'm preparing for a 100 miles [160 km] race in England," he says. A junk food lover - he can never resist a vegan hamburger - Flavien does not quite fit his diet as the races approach. "I eat a lot more because I train a lot more. I have a lot of wheat and legumes in my dishes for energy. "


On a daily basis, no recurring medical appointments or planned meals, prepared with nutrients. "I go to the doctor once a year, to take a blood test and see if I have deficiencies," says Flavien. Since choosing this plan five years ago, the results have always been within the recommended rates. "I do it more for my family, so they do not worry. "

Carl Lewis, holder of nine gold medals in athletics at the Olympic Games, Bode Miller, Olympic skiing medalist, Edwin Moses, undefeated 122 400 times in a row on the XNUMX hurdles, Martina Navratilova, holder of the most titles in the history of tennis: all these vegetarian or vegan champions are shown as examples on vegetarian news sites. "It's proof that it's possible," says another rider, Nicolai Van Lennepkade. Becoming vegan overnight, he never had a problem finishing his marathons. "Like omnivorous sportsmen, care must be taken to compensate for the loss of carbohydrates caused by intensive sports and to eat more. "

A possible association but not recommended

If in fact it is not incompatible to be a great sportsman and vegan, health professionals do not advise. For Frédéric Maton, president of the French Society for Sport Nutrition (SFNS), "veganism is not good for top athletes". One of the major risks: suffer from deficiency of intake or deficiency. "Vegetarians are at risk of deficiencies in B12 vitamins and omega 3 fatty acids, also known as EPA and DHA, which are particularly prevalent in oily fish. The recommended dietary intakes of certain minerals are not covered, especially iron, and must be monitored, "says Séverine Olivié, a dietician specializing in sports. For her, there is a significant difference between the ovo-lacto-vegetarian diet and the vegan diet. "It is very easy to compensate for the stopping of meat with eggs or dairy products, unlike the vegan diet, which is not viable for athletes. "

More surprising, many vegans are also followers of bodybuilding. But to practice intensive bodybuilding, hyperprotein supplements are necessary.
In 2013, Patrick Baboumian moves 550 kg over ten meters and wins the title of "the strongest man in Germany". Far from the image of the bodybuilder devouring two chickens a day, the character is astonishing: he is vegan. Patrick Baboumian quickly became the emblematic figure of the "veggie" champions and took advantage of his notoriety to defend this diet by posing in the advertising campaigns (in English) of the Peta animal welfare association.

But for Nicolas Aubineau, sports nutritionist who offers menus adapted to vegetarians and vegans, we must remember the presence of "complementation" in bodybuilding. "I have more and more people asking me for bodybuilding tips while being vegan or vegetarian. Their diet is possible to combine with an intensive practice of bodybuilding, but it requires a diet based shaker protein flax, hemp or peas. With these dietary supplements, commercially available, bodybuilding and veganism are not inseparable. And to see Patrick Baboumian, we are far from the puny and sickly image often attributed to vegans.

[Janic]

High level sport has always been practiced by VGR athletes like VGL especially in endurance sports:
some famous VGs:
http://www.vegesport.org/celebres.html
http://www.vegetarisme.info/spip.php?rubrique37
http://www.mangez-vegetarien.com/vegeta ... ebres.html
http://www.vegetarismus.ch/heft/f99-3/sport.htm
this last:
Do the athletes need meat?
Teacher. em. Dr. Marcel Hebbelinck,
Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laboratory of Human Biometry, Brussels.

Conference at the 7 ° European Vegetarian Congress in Widnau, Switzerland (18-23 / 07 / 99)

Remarkable results have been recorded by vegetarians and "almost vegetarians" who have provided significant efforts at the physical and mental level.

150 to 300 km walk without stopping is clearly an athletic performance of the highest order. Running over such long distances by mountainous paths pushing the traditional ràràhia, a wooden ball, is very impressive. Yet this is what the Tarahumara Indians of the Chihuaha State of northern Mexico have been doing, as a regular activity of their lives, for hundreds of years. Their daily ration consists of cereals (corn), beans and squash, wild plants and some freshwater fish. The total amount of calories is estimated between 1.200 and 1.500 per day. Milk, meat and eggs are rare products and are consumed only occasionally, during special ceremonies. The fact that Tarahumara can run very long distances on a low-calorie diet and well below conventional standards for protein, carbohydrates, fats (macronutrients), vitamins and minerals (micronutrients), is a challenge to our way of thinking.

Similar athletic performances, albeit less known but equally astonishing, are reported about the Aymara Indians, Lake Titicaca region, Chinese coolies and mountain sherpas, who live on a frugal, almost completely vegetarian diet.

An endurance race of one thousand (1.000) kilometers across Germany, from the Baltic Sea to the Alps, which will be reported during this congress by Professor Jung, also confirms the fact that this very long distance fits perfectly the abilities of athletes eating fully vegetarian meals with a large amount of fresh fruits and raw vegetables.

Here are some interesting examples of vegetarians who have achieved athletic performance, the first having been reported at the Ulm vegetarian World Congress in 1982:

The Widmayer family of artists: At the age of 14, Fogrund Widmayer is the Würtenberg champion in rhythmic sports, and Waltrud Widmayer (whose artist name is Thora von der Teck) has become, at 14 also, champion from Germany in the trapeze discipline. The two Widmayer girls are vegetarians of the third generation.
Another remarkable athletic performance was achieved by the French vegetarian Bernard Gaschard who, in 1998, at the age of 66, participated in a very grueling long distance race, called the "Grand Raid de la Réunion", and who placed first in his age group. In difficult terrain and tropical heat, he ran the 132 km non-stop in 35 hours 58 minutes and 50 seconds. He has been a vegetarian for 40 years, does not consume refined sugar, and does not drink coffee or alcohol.
In 1998, an analysis of the diet of six raw vegans participating in long-distance cycling races was conducted. Each day 1.450 km of the course, the six participants whose age was between 21 and 78 years filled a form where they noted the food and drink consumed. They traveled about 77 km per day with an average of 16 km per hour. The analysis of their foods showed a daily energy intake of 1.348 calories. This very low figure contradicts the energy expenditure estimated at 4.712 calories per day. This difference could not be fully explained by the average weight loss of 4 kilos, which was even lower for some of these participants than 2 kilos. However, the recommended energy proportion of 60% carbohydrates, 30% fats and 10% protein was respected. The participants in question arrived in Stockholm in good shape.
In 1982, breast cancer was diagnosed in Ruth Heidrich, then aged 47. After having a mastectomy at 48, she became vegan and began vigorous physical training, participating in the Hawaii triathlon 'Iron Man / Lady' that she has won six times in her age group. In 1997, at 63 years old, Ruth Heidrich is not only an 'iron woman' vegan who has won about 600 trophies, medals and awards (including 60 races in 1997), but she is also an eminent speaker and the author of two books. In her book A race for life: from cancer to the Ironman, she tells not only her story but also proves that combining healthy eating, vigorous physical exercise and a strong will can overcome the disease.
Recently, in 1998, 31-year-old Swiss Natascha Badman won the 22nd Hawaii Triathlon. "Swimming 3,8 km, pedaling a bicycle 180 km and then running 42 km under a blazing sun (40 degrees centigrade) in 9 hours, 24 minutes and 36 seconds is certainly the very type of high performance sport". Natascha, this powerful 'vegi' woman has been a vegetarian / vegan for ten years.


What about strength sports? Most of the texts dealing with nutrition in the practice of these sports dispute the advisability of a vegetarian or vegan diet for intensive type events. It is however a reality that many vegetarian athletes engaged in "strength" and "muscle" sports are "top level" champions:

Ridgely Abele (USA): 8 times karate champion of the United States
Peter Hussing (Germany): European amateur boxing champion in 1979, super heavyweight category
Andreas Cahling (Sweden / USA): Mr. "Body Building" (bodybuilding) international in 1980
Ingra Manecke (Germany): German champion of the 1977 1982 disc launch
Edwin Moses (USA): Olympic gold medalist and world record holder on 400 m hurdles
Pat Reeves (UK): Vegan, UK Women's Weightlifting Champion and Open, from 1990 to 1998.
We can also mention French skater Surya Bonaly, six-time European champion, American tennis champions Billy Jean King, Chris Evert-Lloyd and Martina Navratilova, all elite athletes who shone in sports requiring both speed and speed. displacement and power.

From a scientific point of view, a curiosity issue is taking creatine as an ergogenic supplement (ie, a performance enhancing product) that is necessary for contractile muscle activities. The bioavailability of creatine is considered a limiting factor for the pursuit of maximal intensity exercise. On the one hand, creatine is continuously supplemented by endogenous biosynthesis from two amino acids in the liver, pancreas and kidneys (arginine and lysine). On the other hand, the diet can be considered as an exogenous source in omnivores, since the meat contains relatively large amounts of creatine.

In the scientific literature, one study reports that vegetarians have lower serum creatinine levels (Delanghe, 1989), and since vegetarians have no external creatine intake, they are considered to be able to perform only modest performance in intensive events. However, as mentioned in the biopsy study of Harris et al. (1992), the two vegetarian subjects evaluated in their experiments had normal levels of creatine.

In light of these contradictory data, we decided (Clarys et al., 1997) to conduct a double-blind experiment on the effect of an oral creatine intake during an intensive challenge in two populations, a vegetarian. one part and not vegetarian on the other hand. The end result of this experimental study was that the supplement did not result in any improvement for vegetarians or non-vegetarians. Hence the finding that there is no evidence of a substantial deficiency of creatine in vegetarians who can only rely on endogenous biosynthesis. It is therefore unjustified to say that a vegetarian diet is not suitable for athletes in disciplines requiring a lot of strength, power and / or speed.

Now let's turn to another myth: that of the protein needs of vegetarian athletes. The emphasis on the importance of protein necessary for athletic performance has a long history, stretching back to the athletes of ancient Greece who were strong meat eaters. In the 19th century, the traditional belief that "meat makes you strong" was reinforced by the well-known chemo-physiologist, von Liebig, who claimed that muscle energy was produced by the oxidation of proteins. Despite the fact that in the 1860s scientists knew that the main "fuels" for muscle work were carbohydrates and to some extent fatty acids, the "protein = strength" myth was maintained and even strengthened during most of this 20th century. Today, however, it is recognized that proteins provide only between 5 and 15% of the energy used during an endurance test.

In athletes engaged in strength sports, the increase in the need for dietary protein is theoretically based on the increase in amino acid oxidation (which happens when the muscles are in action). On the other hand, the extra need for effective muscle mass formation is low, because the muscles are three quarters of water. A quick calculation shows that to increase for example 120 grams per week muscle mass (of which 30 grams only are protein) 4,3 grams of additional protein per day are required, assuming 100% protein utilization efficiency.

It is well accepted that vegetarians can easily meet the relatively low additional protein requirements during endurance competitions, although this may be slightly more difficult for vegetarian athletes in the disciplines of strength, speed and power, such as sprint, weightlifting, etc. For these athletes, a dietary adjustment is recommended (up to 1,5 at 1,8 grams per kilogram of body weight), which can be achieved without difficulty by including more protein-rich foods, such as legumes and foods. soy based. It is important to note that vegetable protein, because of its lower content of amino acids, will probably cause less urinary calcium excretion compared to animal protein. In this respect, it is recommended from the point of view of health, and this not only for vegetarian athletes but also for non-vegetarians, to cope with the increased need for protein by consuming more foods rich in original proteins. vegetable.

In conclusion, it can be said that, on the basis of factual and empirical evidence, vegetarian athletes are capable of high-level performances in all sports disciplines, provided that they follow a globally balanced diet in accordance with the requirements of each individual. test and their respective training conditions.
Once again the speech about deficiencies in B12 and company is fantasy anti VG because rarely (if ever?) Found in these athletes.