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