Re comment:- "So pemmican = Pop Tarts?"

 

Petty much. Pemmican  is full of toxic lipid peroxides, and rendered for ages, not just merely cooked. Here's a  comment (by a fellow rawpalaeo)

from the summary 

mmary of Holistic Cancer Therapy in "Overcoming
> Cancer" by Walter Last:

> "Furthermore, [in cancer] there is commonly a deterioration in the
> lipid (fat-related) composition of the cell walls that allows toxins
> to enter the cells, and prevents waste residue from being removed. The
> main cause of this deterioration is the habitual consumption of heated
> or oxidized fats, and a deficiency of omega-3 fatty acids as in fish
> oils and linseed oil [and, he should have added, in grassfed animal
> fat]."



Re comment:- "Yes...my point was that not all paleo bones show signs of malnutrition 
> or starvation."

 

I don't think any anthropologist is claiming that they were starving all the time, let alone the Rousseau-esque Noble-Savage notion that they were feasting all the time on 3 full meals a day. Given changes in climate/changing migratory patterns of prey etc. etc., it's commonsense to assume that many lived in a feast and famine environment due to constantly varying food-supplies and other conditions,  with a few tribes being very lucky in their choice of territory with full guts  most of the time,

and a few others starving most of the time.


 

Re comment:- "
Dairy products contain lactose (sugar). "  That doesn't apply 

 re my mention of butter as butter contains only tiny trace amounts of lactose and yet contains masses of harmful AGEs by itself.

. Plus, you won't find such AGEs in grassfed raw dairy, only in pasteurised dairy. No wonder, so many people report feeling better on raw dairy than on pasteurised dairy, by comparison.

 

Re ALEs:- ALEs form in the presence of proteins and fats not glucose  so could easily harm zero-carbers, for example. As regards cause and effect, I'll concede that many studies(not all) do focus too much 

on diabetes and high-carb diets, so far,

 and it would be nice to see if zero-carbers could be studied(if only to see whether Stefansson's comment re rapid aging among the eskimoes is correct, lol!

 

.What I find telling, though, is that often these AGE-related conditions are similiarly 

reduced in effect if the peoples' AGE levels are either reduced artificially or via a low-AGE diet.

 

 

Re comment:- "
(I do cook my chicken well, though not 1 hour broiled 
> chicken breast like in one of the studies you linked!)"

 

I think(?) that was the newcastleyoga link which served to show that cooking for slightly longer periods at a slightly lower  temperature was generally more beneficial than cooking at slightly higher temperatures for slightly shorter periods. 

 

Geoff

 

 
> Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 10:20:10 -0400
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Joint pains etc.
> To: [log in to unmask]
> 
> Geoffrey Purcell wrote:
> > Re pemmican comment:- I'm always amazed at why anyone can recommend pemmican. The whole point of the healthy foods movement is to stay well away from any preserved foods which last for decades, as there's a standard rule that the longer the shelf-life of a food , the lower its quality will always be. Pemmican is really no different in this regard from all those processed junk foods designed to last years and years on the supermarket shelf.
> > 
> So pemmican = Pop Tarts?
> > 
> > Re comment:- "Starvation/malnutrition also leaves telltale marks on the bones as well"
> > 
> > As I showed in a recent post, there were indeed examples of telltale marks of starvation on palaeo bones:-
> > I made that point re famine as it's commonly accepted by palaeoanthropologists that famine was a routine part of the palaeolithic era:-
> > 
> > "Combined with a relatively low average age at death, the hypoplasia evidence suggests that Neandertals underwent periods of nutritional stress or famine on a frequent basis " taken from:-
> >
> > http://www.pnas.org/content/98/19/10972.full
> > 
> Yes...my point was that not all paleo bones show signs of malnutrition 
> or starvation.
> > Re comment on AGEs:- "AGE's require glucose and oxidization. Many studies implicating 
> > 
> >> cooking/fried foods included high amounts of PUFA's and/or other 
> >> 'modern' foods including foods that break down to glucose."
> >> 
> > 
> > This is very misleading. AGEs do NOT just require glucose. That applies to only 1 type of AGE. There is also another category of AGEs, known as "ALEs"(="Advanced Lipoxidation Endproducts") which involve the oxidation of fats and don't require glucose:-
> >
> > 
> >
> > http://www.redorbit.com/news/health/1067029/advanced_glycation_and_lipoxidation_end_productsamplifiers_of_inflammation_the_role/index.html
> > 
> Dairy products contain lactose (sugar). Here's my overall point re: 
> AGE's/ALE's: do they matter in a healthy body that is not consuming much 
> sugar or inflammatory foods? This piece said over half the studies have 
> been performed on ppl either with diabetes or renal disease. These 
> people already have massive stuff going on, and the association with 
> AGE's/ALE's could be just that - an association. This was interesting: 
> "Experimental studies suggest that increased deposition of AGEs/ALEs in 
> tissues is strongly associated with down-regulation of leptin expression 
> in adipocytes and metabolic syndrome." Metabolic syndrome = high 
> circulating insulin levels, insulin resistance, etc. Leptin 
> down-regulation = high triglycerides, which are a common occurence in 
> high-carb diets. Suddenly, we're back to glucose as a factor, if not in 
> their formation but in their deposition. Note I say FACTOR. Everything 
> works together in the body. So my interest is if AGE's/ALE's are 
> primarily a problem for people who have an internal situation in which 
> deposition of these things is increased due to existing diet-related 
> conditions -- and not a problem (or perhaps much less of a problem) in 
> people who do not. HIgh levels are repeatedly found in ppl with chronic 
> disease -- ok, but are they the CAUSE of the disease, or are they a 
> factor combined with several other factors?
> > 
> >
> > 
> > Interestingly, it's been pointed out that the reason why so many
> > studies (correctly) report harmful results from eating diets high in saturated fats may be
> > primarily due, not to the issue of saturated fats per se, but to the fact that such diets are also very high in heat-created toxins, resulting
> > from cooking, such as AGEs/ALEs(in other words, raw saturated fats are fine but not cooked saturated fats)):-
> >
> > "It has been suggested that, "given the prominence of this type of food in the
> > human diet, the deleterious effects of high-(saturated)fat foods may be in part
> > due to the high content in glycotoxins, above and beyond those due to oxidized
> > fatty acid derivatives." The glycotoxins, as he called them, are more
> > commonly called AGEs:-
> >
> > http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=21074
> > 
> The control meal in this study was cooked chicken egg whites, and the 
> AGE meal was egg whites with fructose? Maybe I am missing something?
> Also: "Diabetic subjects were maintained on their diabetic diets, as 
> provided by the metabolic ward, divided into 15–20% protein, 30–35% fat, 
> and 45–50% carbohydrates, while breakfast carbohydrates were 
> supplemented with apple juice". It appears as if these researchers 
> don't consider carbohydrates as particularly important in diabetes, 
> which is both telling and alarming.
> 
> I do find this interesting, I just would like to see better studies. If 
> they aren't taking other dietary factors into account, we're not really 
> learning much other than that associations exist, but that's not a whole 
> lot to go on either. The prevalence of focus on diabetics, for example, 
> suggests to me that they're searching for a cause of diabetes that 
> doesn't involve carbs -- in other words, that will fit with what they've 
> already been recommending for diabetics.
> 
> Incidentally - I eat very lightly cooked meat ;) I like my steak seared 
> on the outside, raw in the middle. I prefer fish raw. Just so you know 
> I'm not some shoe-leather steak fan trying to justify her love of 
> overcooked meat. (I do cook my chicken well, though not 1 hour broiled 
> chicken breast like in one of the studies you linked!)

_________________________________________________________________
Get the best of MSN on your mobile
http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/147991039/direct/01/