Ellie Rotunno wrote:
> > Hi all on this raw-food list.
> > I've been lurking for a few weeks and am now put to shame for not
> > jumping in. I am incredibly grateful for all I've learned from you and
> > still somewhat afraid of saying something stupid. I'm also overwhelmed
> > by cyberspace, and have other goings on, so I am not a daily observer. I
> > realize it's all about putting in my 2 cents and getting the feedback
> > needed to help me and all arrive at the truth, so here are some comments.
> > I am not an organic chemist, but have some experience in research in
> > biochemisty, and had some colleagues who were organic chemists. My
> > understanding of how organic reactions occur is that there is a
> > theoretical equilibrium constant for all organic reations, so that when
> > two molecules exist together, a reaction may start at any temperature.
> > Heat or sun merely speed up the reaction, so that a temp. of 105F isn't a
> > point at which Mallaird's molecules suddenly form. For example, the
> > reation of chlorine and methane gas is so slow it's nearly untectable
> > (but does proceed)in a gaseous mixture kept in the dark, but upon
> > exposure to sunlight, an immediate reaction occurs. So I would expect
> > Maillard's molecules would form in small amounts in foods whether dried,
> > frozen, left in the sun, heated, shaken, etc.
> >
> > I also have a question that relates to the subject of whether we are
> > adapted to protein in the flesh of bovine animals and milk protein from
> > cows. My understanding of protein is that it is broken down in the
> > digestive tract to amino acids, which are then absorbed into the blood
> > stream, assimlated, and anabolized into the protein for the individual.
> > Unless we have leaky guts, proteins don't enter the blood stream except
> > maybe a few dipeptides or small polypeptides. Whether we are adapted to a
> > protein food would depend on whether we have enough specific hydrolytic
> > enzymes to break the peptide linkages in that protein, not whether our
> > own protein is similar to that of the animal we eat (Burger's theory). We are each in need
> > of billions of combinations of amino acids to make up the various
> > proteins in our bodies, and also each of us has a different make up of
> > protein according to our differing genes. I don't understand the
> > arguement that if bovine milk protein is not similar to human protein
> > that it is then not usable for us. As long as we get all the amino acids
> > needed to build our particular protein, who cares whether it comes from
> > flesh or milk or anywhere else. I suspect that our intstictive taste is
> > so brilliantly designed that we naturally choose those foods which
> > contain the amino acids we need for our specific protein makeup and which
> > are digestable by our enzymes. So if raw milk tastes good to us, it
> > should be what we need. What do you all think?

> > Thanks again for all your posts. Ellie Rotunno