Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That is incorrect. The majority of people -do- produce lactase. Some produce more than others, and the production distribution is influenced by genetics -and- evolution of the species. Lactose intolerant people generally produce -less- lactase than non-intolerant people, but most of them -do- produce it, nonetheless. And that's that.
So: you got that fact wrong, and you have been shown by others to have gotten several other facts wrong. You are basing your conclusions and opinions on facts that have been proven to be incorrect. How much longer will you continue to argue in favor of your flawed opinion, before you choose to consider the actual facts, and re-consider your stance? Or - are you simply arguing because you insist on being right, even when you're wrong?
Dear, you've been corrected several times here as well. More than several. What is it, exactly, that affects you so much at a (forgive me) gut level about the thought of eating minimally-processed and non-processed foods that you need to get snippy?
As for the last sentence, oh my, AC. Reading back on your posts I can only giggle at the irony, but that's lucky because at least I'm not mad!
By the way, what was "wrong" in my statement was to say people aren't producing lactase, v. that they may be producing tiny amounts, but insufficient amounts to handle lactose healthfully, so is that particular point really the be-all here?
This subject REALLY gets people emotional. People just freak out on "no wheat" and "no dairy". You'd think suggesting meat, vegetables, fruits, nuts and seeds was akin to The Purina One Diet or the Don't Ever Breathe the Atmosphere diet. Maybe what you should be asking *yourself* is what's triggering you so badly -- are you actually questioning yourself, but are afraid to be wrong?
As an aside, any time you'd like to start a thread on your body height and weight (yes, it does count to an extent), and your lates blood lipids and fasting blood glucose, plus *your way of eating* (I notice you criticize an awful lot of other people's ways of eating, vitamin therapies, workouts, etc., etc., etc. as being total B.S. -- this rabid "you're doing something stupid" postings (and "your nonsensical theories," "you are wrong," blah blah insults -- insecurity complex much, hon?) to other people seems rather common for you, just reading some of your past posts -- but are carefully not mentioning your own), I'd be happy to let you know what I think of it.
Good heavens but you're a cheerful one, you must be a scream at parties. Sorry. Somebody had to say it. Lighten up. For the love of God. Or don't...I suppose that's up to you but...yikes. I'm just trying to picture this. (Man at party) "Well, at least we had beautiuful weather today, with such a blue sky." (Anon Chick) "That is incorrect. You, like so many others who refuse to see reality and have little to no knowledge of science, yet insist on spouting bogus information, believe the sky is colored blue, when in actuality, the depth of the various layers of..........." (Anon Chick goes on and on for the next 45 minutes, not noticing that the guy has slunk away quietly)
Okay, so anyway, getting on with things. As I said, my bloods are already good and I'm doing this for general health/reduction of "autoimmune" symptoms (I do have a DXd autoimmune disease, which I am medicated for to within range).
So here were my latest results as of a month ago:
Cholesterol, total: 181 (Reference range: 100-199)
Triglycerides: 69 (Range: 0-149)
HDL Cholesterol: 60 (Range: >39)
VLDL Cholesterol: 14 (Range: 5-40)
LDL Cholesterol Calc: 107 (Range: 0-99) (this was going on the downside from 141 the previous blood draw 3 months earlier, while I was eating grains/SAD/low-fat)
My serum glucose was 77 (Range: 65-99), down from 108 previously eating grains (not a fluke, as the three times prior to my 108, I got measurements of 99, 103 and 104 respectively). My BUN/Creatine ratio was 19 (Range: 9-23).
Thyroids were within range, though barely. But when we had upped my meds just slightly to see if it would help the tiredness, rashes, autoimmune stuff, etc., my body went insane and hyper, so we switched back. It's not the hypo itself, it's not the med itself, it's not Vit D (that's fine), hemoglobin, iron, B12...but the one thing I did see that directly affected me in a measurable way (see the notes above) was taking the grains out.
Not a great weight loss was seen between grains and going grain-free...about 10 lbs. Probably not enough for weight loss itself to have effected the changes and the great levels.
This was within two months of my starting my grain-free lifestyle, IIRC. I need to go back and check that.
The changes I've made since my "no grains" thing, and the changes I will be tracking, are: no more dairy, no more legumes, and minimally processed foods (Paleo). If anything drastic happens and it's a bad "anything," I'll know, at least anecdotally, that Paleo is the devil and it's going to kill me. If not, and if I continue to feel better (my one rash is GONE, I can't believe it!) then I'll carry on with Paleo.
I love how people call out scientific inaccuracies and the default defense mechanism of those being called out is to play the emotional card. It's especially ironic considering how fast the OP feigned offense over my critic of this diet, which she asked for.
Well, time for some more facts I see.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerZ
Dear, you've been corrected several times here as well. More than several.
That's funny, considering she is correct. At least, in this context.
Quote:
Primary Lactase Deficiency
Approximately 70% of the world’s population has primary lactase deficiency.7,8 The percentage varies according to ethnicity and is related to the use of dairy products in the diet, resulting in genetic selection of individuals with the ability to digest lactose (Table 1). In populations with a predominance of dairy foods in the diet, particularly northern European people, as few as 2% of the population has primary lactase deficiency. In contrast, the prevalence of primary lactase deficiency is 50% to 80% in Hispanic people, 60% to 80% in black and Ashkenazi Jewish people, and almost 100% in Asian and American Indian people.9–11 The age of onset and its prevalence differ among various populations. Approximately 20% of Hispanic, Asian, and black children younger than 5 years of age have evidence of lactase deficiency and lactose malabsorption,12 whereas white children typically do not develop symptoms of lactose intolerance until after 4 or 5 years of age.
Whether the "majority" of people have this condition or not depends on the demographics used. If you're American (the OP is) and white (I can only assume) then you only have a 1 in 5 chance. If you're of Asian descent, you're almost certain to have it.
Of course, this underscores part of the absurdity of the Paleo diet. They contend that you should decide to eat or not eat certain foods based on whether our Paleolithic ancestors consumed them. Their rationale is that our bodies were meant to consume those foods, but the scientific research clearly shows that populations that consume an abundance of dairy products have few cases of lactose intolerance. Thus it's easy to conclude that our bodies adopt much quicker than the Paleo dieters would like to believe and the entire premise of their diet is essentially rendered false. Furthermore, if you look at the diets of "healthy" populations...including those in the blue zones...you'll find substantial variations.
Quote:
What is it, exactly, that affects you so much at a (forgive me) gut level about the thought of eating minimally-processed and non-processed foods that you need to get snippy?
Quote:
This subject REALLY gets people emotional. People just freak out on "no wheat" and "no dairy". You'd think suggesting meat, vegetables, fruits, nuts and seeds was akin to The Purina One Diet or the Don't Ever Breathe the Atmosphere diet. Maybe what you should be asking *yourself* is what's triggering you so badly -- are you actually questioning yourself, but are afraid to be wrong?
I'm just going to take a guess here and assume that someone like Anon...who is educated in science...probably gets a little sick of the rabid "organic" and "natural" kick that people seem to be on. Generally speaking, there is nothing inherently unhealthy about "processed" foods. I'm going to borrow a post from one of my favorite posters, because she can make the point much better than I can.
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010
And I do not think that "processed" foods are inherently inferior. Sure, I would love to have home baked bread and home grown vegetables every day, but its not going to happen. The additives are there to add flavor and retard spoilage. And most of the additives have been around long enough that if they were causing problems we would know about it by now. It is now possible to get frozen and canned foods with less sodium, which is good for those who need to limit it and probably for all of us. Frozen vegetables without added sauces are nutritionally just about equal to fresh.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerZ
ETA: 'K, AnonChick. I see on the photographic height/weight chart, you said:
Okay, listen. Any body type can be considered beautiful, BMI isn't everything, people can be heavy "due to muscle" (a very good amount, and you state you're not as "athletic" as the one person, who already doesn't look athletic at all, frankly), blah, blah, etc., but...frankly, sweetie...and I mean no insult, but I am not going to take my healthy eating and exercise tips from you based on your end result, which is much larger even than my beginning weight and, whether healthy or unhealthy, is simply not in line with my goals (if those are your goals and you're fine with it, then that's fine).
Again. Needed to be said.
Oh, I see. Your believe is that knowledge and the self application of knowledge are mutually exclusive. Unfortunately, you're wrong. Let me give you a couple examples.
One of my favorite football coaches is a guy named Josh McDaniels. He was the offensive coordinator for the New England during their record setting 2007 season, and became the head coach of the Denver Broncos (my favorite team) in 2009. Josh is widely regarded as one of...if not the best...quarterback coaches in all of professional football. Under his tutelage, Tom Brady went from a pretty good quarterback to arguably the greatest of all time. A guy named Matt Cassel took over for Brady when he injured his knee in the 2008 season opener. Despite the fact that he didn't start a game through all 4 years of college, Matt turned in a very good performance of his own and parlayed that into a very lucrative contract with the Kansas City Chiefs. Josh's quarterback in Denver was a guy named Kyle Orton, who was an average at best starter with his previous team but put up near All-Pro numbers when working under Josh.
Why is all of this relevant? Josh McDaniels is about 5'8 and 170 lbs soaking wet. He probably couldn't play in the NFL at all, much less at a position like quarterback where only two or three guys are under 6'1. Despite his physical limitation, Josh clearly has the knowledge to instruct others how to play the position.
For an even more relevant example, consider Lyle McDonald. Lyle is a former Olympic caliber speed skater, and rather diminutive in stature, and those in the body building and power lifting fields might be prone to dismiss his teachings based off appearance alone. Of course if you look deeper you'll learn that he has a degree kinesiology from UCLA, has written a handful of books on exercise and dieting that are regarded as some of the best in the genre and has personally trained some elite power lifters.
My point in all of this is simple. Don't make the mistake of pigeon holing someone's advice based on their ability or desire to actually follow that advice. I know that "practice what you preach" might be a catchy cliche', but real life doesn't always work like that. Your ad hominem attacks on Anon's appearance show only serve to show your own insecurities and intellectual inability to debate the facts of the matter.
It is absolutely amazing how people freak out when grains are threatened. It's frighteningly close to telling a crack addict you're going to take away his rock.
Keep eating grains and breastmilk, people. You're adults, you can eat what you want. Nobody is going to yank your Pop Tart away. (I feel like I'm comforting my children...)
And I shall continue to report on how I do on Paleo. Still going strong, still feeling good.
Again, should I begin to die from eating natural foods, rather than call for my husband or children I will be sure to call for my laptop so I can quickly type a post, "People, start eating processed foods right now!" as a special service to you. Okay, Bosco55David? I promise.
And the OP runs head long into the same logical fallacy I just pointed out.
Facepalm.
And you care because...? ETA: Oh WAIT, WAIT, I know this one! Because you just hate to see illogic run rampant through society and you are a champion of the people who just happens to lurk around some vague internet forum waiting to jump on people and call them "retards" and "Paleotards." Okay! So...the "because I hate misinformation" gambit is...(checking card) ...the "I" in I-Have-No-Good-Answer-To-This Bingo. I'm winning! I think between your and AnonChick's posts, I just have two letters to go.
You seem awfully invested in your uber-processed staple product there, Jim Morrison. Just relax, as I said, the very instant I get the diagnosis of malnutrition, lupus, MS and cancer from eating meats, poultry, fish, vegetables, fruit, seeds and nuts, I will be right back here to tell you how right you were all long. So relax there, Sparky.
Have patience. You believe this WOE is crap; I will be having bloods drawn in 7 weeks. Should they show that my body is begining to cannibalize itself from lack of Wonder Bread and calf food, I will be the first to eat crow.
Holy yikes.
In the meantime, got anything to say about the very weird way my lipids righted themselves once I quit grains? Is this the terrible calm before the Non-Roman Meal Bread Eating Storm? My body is going to freak out any minute because I haven't eaten anything that's been separated, bleached, soaked, dried, chemicalized and pounded any second now?
I better get ready. (Oh, and hey, speaking of facepalms!...Nah, never mind. Just a smiley. Because you obviously need one!)
And you care because...? ETA: Oh WAIT, WAIT, I know this one! Because you just hate to see illogic run rampant through society and you are a champion of the people who just happens to lurk around some vague internet forum waiting to jump on people and call them "retards" and "Paleotards." Okay! So...the "because I hate misinformation" gambit is...(checking card) ...the "I" in I-Have-No-Good-Answer-To-This Bingo. I'm winning! I think between your and AnonChick's posts, I just have two letters to go.
What makes you think I care? I am simply here discussing topics, and your short bus style just happens to be the current hot topic. Whatever happens to you is ultimately unimportant to me.
Since you want to go down this road, why did you get your panties all up in a bunch when you didn't like my critique? Your first post here was pretty clear that you wanted to "discuss" this diet, so your words don't lie up with your actions. Could it be that you had simply already made up your mind about going on this diet and really just wanted validation and encouragement for your decisions and lashed out when the flaws were pointed out?
Bosco thinks this might be the case.
Quote:
You seem awfully invested in your uber-processed staple product there, Jim Morrison.
Ahh, yes. The "you take your positions because you have something to gain from them" mantra. Rally cry of the uninformed. It's as comical as it is common. Just in the last 6 months I've been accused of being financially invested in aspartame and HFCS by the conspiracy theorists. Guess I should add grains and processed food to that list too, right?
Quote:
In the meantime, got anything to say about the very weird way my lipids righted themselves once I quit grains?
I have a couple of theories. Give me more information and I'll tell you why it likely happened. Let's start with a very detailed and honest breakdown of your pre-paleo eating habits.
Quote:
I better get ready. (Oh, and hey, speaking of facepalms!...Nah, never mind. Just a smiley. Because you obviously need one!)
No need for smileys here. I'm fit, healthy and I didn't have to make unnecessary restrictions of perfectly healthy foods to get there. In fact, I'm going to go slam down a couple glasses of protein and calcium rich milk, because I ****ing love milk.
Since you want to go down this road, why did you get your panties all up in a bunch when you didn't like my critique? Your first post here was pretty clear that you wanted to "discuss" this diet, so your words don't lie up with your actions. Could it be that you had simply already made up your mind about going on this diet and really just wanted validation and encouragement for your decisions and lashed out when the flaws were pointed out?
Bosco thinks this might be the case.
Well then Bosco would be wrong, and Bosco would do well to stop pretending he can read people's minds. (Or if he really can, might I be able to send him like $250 and have him e-mail me my Lucky Lotto Numbers? Also, I'd really like to know whether I should change careers. Let me know, thanks.)
Here's the truth for Bosco, the bare-bones truth:
Because you said "Paleotard" on my thread, and "retarded" on another Paleo thread, and I happen to be the parent of a retarded person. Yes, that reaction was emotional. But not exactly for the reasons Bosco thought. (And the reaction didn't negate the fact that eating whole foods is healthy. Just thought I'd slip that in...Here, have a Pop Tart.)
Bosco might want to stop second-guessing people, and start really listening. On the other hand, Bosco is an adult (sort of) and can do as he pleases, I suppose. (shrug) But yep, there you have it. That's why I care. Not because of the reasons you've conjured up. Who has his/her mind made up in advance, again?
ETA: Just a little p.s. Bosco might want to take note of the fact that "retarded" isn't really the word used any more. It's "intellectually delayed." "Retarded" is being outed by the scientific community because of nasty, cruel people who misuse it (hey, sound familiar?). Since Bosco likes to be right, JerZ thought she'd give him a quick heads-up about that. Okay, on with the show following this little detour.
In that case, I suggest you grow thicker skin. I'm sorry that your child suffers from his/her condition, and I'm sorry if it offended you, but no matter how wrong or right it might be, "retarded" is a noun used to describe stupidity or ineffectiveness rather than only a medical condition. Even the wonderful dictionary acknowledges that. If that word is going to get you riled up, you're going to have a very angry life.
Moving on though, why didn't you answer my question about your pre-paleo diet habits?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sorry. Somebody had to say it. Lighten up. For the love of God. Or don't...I suppose that's up to you but...yikes. I'm just trying to picture this. (Man at party) "Well, at least we had beautiuful weather today, with such a blue sky." (Anon Chick) "That is incorrect. You, like so many others who refuse to see reality and have little to no knowledge of science, yet insist on spouting bogus information, believe the sky is colored blue, when in actuality, the depth of the various layers of..........." (Anon Chick goes on and on for the next 45 minutes, not noticing that the guy has slunk away quietly)
I promise.
