Smile Posted May 14, 2006 Hey, Â That guy Jerney from HT forum posted some very interesting links: Â rvmanual (firedocs.com)irva.com recommended reading (warcollier, macmoneagle, swann, buchannan, other reports) swann essays (biomindsuperpowers.com) matrix5 (the rotes explaination) trv sets (psi-tech.com) Â One of them http://irva.com/ has quotes from a book "The China Study : The Most Comprehensive Study of Nutrition Ever Conducted and the Startling Implications for Diet, Weight Loss and Long-Term Health" Â I ordered it- will see what it has to offer. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mYTHmAKER Posted May 15, 2006 Hey, Â That guy Jerney from HT forum posted some very interesting links: One of them http://irva.com/ has quotes from a book "The China Study : The Most Comprehensive Study of Nutrition Ever Conducted and the Startling Implications for Diet, Weight Loss and Long-Term Health" Â I ordered it- will see what it has to offer. Â Â Basically the study shows that chinese people who traditionally eat lots of vegies and grains with a little meat and fish don't get the diseases we do in the west. In the big cities, however, where KFC and other western fast food establishments have sprung up and as they have made their diet more like ours western disease has followed. Joel Fuhrman says that he doesn't know whether being vegetarian is really healthier than eating meat and fish as long as you eat less than 12 ounces ( I think that's the number) a week. After that disease starts to kick in. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Smile Posted May 15, 2006 (edited) Thanks, Mythmaker  Here is something I found that could be interesting. Related to detoxification and anti-aging. http://www.zhealthinfo.com/information.htm Edited May 15, 2006 by Smile Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
agharta Posted May 15, 2006 Sorry, but it just isn't as simple as avoiding meat and fish. Hello? Eskimos who eat almost nothing BUT meat and fish, and have no tooth decay, heart disease, cancer, etc.. Read "nutrition and physical degeneration". Â It's not a cold environment or being near the poles that is the key, either, which was a bullshit theory proposed by the dietarily-clueless Juan Li a few years ago. plenty of East African tribes eat almost nothing but meat, milk, and blood, and have excellent health, no heart disease, etc. Â They key is the health of the animal, lack of toxins (environmental and endemic), and the body parts you eat. It's a bigger topic than one past can cover. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Smile Posted May 16, 2006 Sorry, but it just isn't as simple as avoiding meat and fish. Hello? Eskimos who eat almost nothing BUT meat and fish, and have no tooth decay, heart disease, cancer, etc.. Read "nutrition and physical degeneration". Look up Eskimo's life expectancy. It's in the mid 60's for males and low 70's for females. Some sources say it's in the 40's because of drugs and alchohol, high unemployment rates, etc. Â You are certainly right though. The health of the animal and the quality of meat is very important. Plus living in nature. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
karen Posted May 16, 2006 Look up Eskimo's life expectancy. It's in the mid 60's for males and low 70's for females. Some sources say it's in the 40's because of drugs and alchohol, high unemployment rates, etc. Â Yes, because they're not eating their native diet, and modern lifestyle factors apply to everyone. But the Eskimos eating their native diet of meat and fish were extraordinarily healthy. Same for the other native cultures that agharta mentioned. Weston Price's book is a seminal work. Â But it doesn't mean that we can simply eat a native diet and expect to always achieve the level of health that people had in the past, because our subtle energy anatomy is different, and our constitutional weaknesses are different. Diet is an important part of health building, but has a somewhat different place in the scheme than it did for other generations. Â Karen Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thelerner Posted May 16, 2006 I read the veggie life style is healthy not so much because of lack of meat as because of so much more vegetables, fruit, legumes, nuts etc. then the rest of us. More of the good stuff. Â Also much of our meat is hormone and grain fed, get little exercise, consequently its much higher in saturated fats then say Brazilian and other grass fed grazers. Part of the eskimo paradox is that they eat the whole animal, particularly the liver and other organ meats. Extremely high in vitamins and enzymes, much greater then the muscle meat we chow down on. Plus as with all hunter societies eats wild animals, so you benefit from the myriad herbs and varied diet of what the prey ate, much greater then a similar farmed variety. Â Michael Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
neimad Posted May 16, 2006 i really like chicken liver.... Â i tried cows brain once, not so much a fan of that though as it feels like it should be sweet but its not (the texture of it). i like tongue though.... only ever tried pigs guts and thats just disgusting, i don't like pig anymore anyway. Â but yeah i'm keen for hunting your own meat and then eating all of it.... if you can't kill an animal then no way should you eat it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mYTHmAKER Posted May 16, 2006 There is a cartoon in the latest New Yorker. Two cavemen sitting in a cave. The caption is: "Something's just not right - our air is clean, our water is pure, we get plenty of exercise, everything we eat is organic and free - range, and yet nobody lives past thirty" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
neimad Posted May 17, 2006 There is a cartoon in the latest New Yorker. Two cavemen sitting in a cave. The caption is: "Something's just not right - our air is clean, our water is pure, we get plenty of exercise, everything we eat is organic and free - range, and yet nobody lives past thirty" Â hahaha yeah... Â honestly i have great doubts about history as it is told to us. Â like all this "our life expectancy is greater than ever before" nonsense. i am certain that traditional people living natural lifestyles, when not fallen victim to naturally occurring accidents, would have lived long lives for sure..... Â based on the time it takes for our skeletal structure to reach maturity compared to all other animals, we should be living till 130-150 easily. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pietro Posted May 17, 2006 Ok, a few info and correction based on the sources. I have the books from Stefensson here. They are mostly the books refered to when people speak about eskimo. Â a) it is not true that they eat always the whole of the animal. They tended to give to the dogs the interior. But I also don't think that they would also only take the lean meat. Just they mostly would not eat the organs. But yes they would eat the fat. (I am not saying that the organs are bad. I think they are very good, and full of enzymes, which is why wild animals are eating them first. Just the eskimo would not eat them often) Â most of the time they live in a hot and damp climate uh? Â well, inside the igloo was actually very hot and damp. I don't know why, as I suppose that an igloo made of ice could not be hotter than 0 degrees, but according to what stefensson who stayed with them and lived in their house for years) sais. Inside their huts it was so hot that everybody would be naked all the time. (also him who is a westerner). And damp too. The only moment when an eskimo would go in the cold was often to pee or for few hours in the morning. This is winter. Â In fact he states that probably it is because of this hot and dump environment that also they achieved some fantastic health. Â And c) it is not true that they have such a short life expectancy. Provided that you are speaking about eskimo living in their traditional lifestyle with no modern diet. Â For the differences on the health between before and after using a western diet you can get it all from the Weston a Price book. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mYTHmAKER Posted May 18, 2006 Ok, a few info and correction based on the sources. I have the books from Stefensson here. They are mostly the books refered to when people speak about eskimo. Â a) it is not true that they eat always the whole of the animal. They tended to give to the dogs the interior. But I also don't think that they would also only take the lean meat. Just they mostly would not eat the organs. But yes they would eat the fat. (I am not saying that the organs are bad. I think they are very good, and full of enzymes, which is why wild animals are eating them first. Just the eskimo would not eat them often) Â most of the time they live in a hot and damp climate uh? Â well, inside the igloo was actually very hot and damp. I don't know why, as I suppose that an igloo made of ice could not be hotter than 0 degrees, but according to what stefensson who stayed with them and lived in their house for years) sais. Inside their huts it was so hot that everybody would be naked all the time. (also him who is a westerner). And damp too. The only moment when an eskimo would go in the cold was often to pee or for few hours in the morning. This is winter. Â In fact he states that probably it is because of this hot and dump environment that also they achieved some fantastic health. Â And c) it is not true that they have such a short life expectancy. Provided that you are speaking about eskimo living in their traditional lifestyle with no modern diet. Â For the differences on the health between before and after using a western diet you can get it all from the Weston a Price book. Â Â Did it mention anything about them eating seaweed. Collecting it in summer and storing it for winter Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pietro Posted May 18, 2006 Did it mention anything about them eating seaweed. Collecting it in summer and storing it for winter Nop. Not as far as I have read. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites