Dearest Liza, > Wes, so far you have not provided a single reference. What you have done > is quote out of some of the currently fashionable books in the popular > literature, which you found in your health food store. If the following messages I recently posted aren't references, then I don't know what is: --- Although not usually recognized, considerable protein destruction takes place as foods are heated. This has been underscored by an editorial in Nutrition News. "It has been postulated the dry heat processing of proteins produces a new lysine linkage which is either not digestible by enzymes or is so slowly digested that lysine enters the blood stream too late to participate with the rest of the assimilated amino acids in tissue formation." More severe heat damage to proteins results when moist heat is used. When reducing sugars (e.g. glucose) are present, true destruction of amino acids has been repeatedly corroborated. This destruction may account for a loss of 50% of the lysine, arginine, tryptophan, and histidine content. Reference: "Present status of heat-processing damage to protein foods". Nutrit. Rev. 8: #7, 193-196, July 1950 --- A startling example of protein destruction during the cooking of food was reported at the Mead Johnson Research Center in Evansville, Indiana. It was discovered that the stockpile of survival biscuits and crackers developed by the Office of Civil Defense for use in catastrophic emergencies was significantly deficient in essential amino acid content. Actually two-thirds of the lysine was destroyed presumably during the baking of these foods. Reference: Longenecker, J. B. and Sarett, H. P. "Nutritional quality of survival biscuits and crackers". Am. J. Clin. Nutrit. 13: #5, 291-296, November 1963. I should also note that cooking creates carcinogenic and mutagenic substances in proteins and fats. Cooked proteins and fats are full of free radicals as well. Ingestion of cooked proteins and fats increases entropy - accelerates the aging process, and contributes to a myriad of disease processes. --- Came across some information from Bruce Ames, regarding mutagenesis, carcinogenesis and the degenerative diseases of aging... Cooking food is plausible as a contributor to cancer. A wide variety of chemicals are formed during cooking. Four groups of chemicals that cause tumors in rodents have attracted attention because of mutagenicity, potency, and concentration. a) Nitrosamines are formed from nitrogen oxides present in gas flames or from other burning. Surprisingly little work has been done on the levels of nitrosamines in fish or meat cooked in gas ovens or barbecued, considering their mutagenic and carcinogenic potency. b) Heterocyclic amines are formed from heating amino acids or proteins. c) Polycyclic hydrocarbons are formed from charring meat. d) Furfural and similar furans are formed from heating sugars. Heating fat generates mutagenic epoxides, hydroperoxides, and unsaturated aldehydes, and may also be of importance. Epidemiological studies on cooking are difficult and so far are inadequate to resolve a carcinogenic effect in humans. Humans also ingest large numbers of natural chemicals from cooking food. For example, more than a thousand chemicals have been identified in roasted coffee; more than half of those tested (19/26) are rodent carcinogens. There are more natural carcinogens by weight in a single cup of coffee than potentially carcinogenic synthetic pesticide residues in the average U. S. diet in a year, and there are still a thousand known chemicals in roasted coffee that have not been tested. This does not necessarily mean that coffee is dangerous, but that animal cancer tests and worst-case risk assessments build in enormous safety factors and should not be considered true risks. References: International Agency for Research on Cancer (1993) Some naturally occurring substances: Food items and constituents, heterocyclic aromatic amines and mycotoxins (International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France). Gold, L. S., Slone, T. H., Stern, B. R., Manley, N. B. & Ames, B. N. (1992) Science 258, 261-265. Gold, L. S., Slone, T. H., Manley, N. B. & Ames, B. N. (1994) Cancer Lett. 83, 21-29. --- Another one... Researchers, having discovered numerous diseases associated with meat consumption, have now done risk assessment work with "doneness" of red meats. There is much more of this risk assessment work in the pipelines as well. This allows nutritional propaganda to be produced that will obtain maximum savings from "health care" by capping worst risk diseases while also protecting industry from sudden change. The researchers say; "We found increasing risk with increasing doneness," said Mary H. Ward, a cancer institute epidemiologist who presented the findings Monday at a meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research. Meat eaters who prefer their meat medium to well done are about 3 times as likely as those who prefer their meat rare or medium to get stomach cancer. The cancer is due to heterocyclic amines, powerful mutagens and carcinogens formed when creatinine in meats is cooked at high temperatures. Creatinine (creatine anhydride) is present in all muscle tissues. While roasting, which is cooking slowly at lower temperature may reduce heterocyclic amine content, and thus give some protection from stomach cancer, this will not help when one considers other diseases such as heart disease which are related to fat or formation of faecal mutagens. The problem with roast beef is that the blood, lymphatic fluid (for pus), fat, uric acid- urine contains traces of creatine, and other fluids that run off onto the pan bubble and burn to form the juice that becomes the "gravy" or pan dippings. These contain the heterocyclic amines in concentration. The burnt meat on the outside of the joint contains other carcinogens called polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. These produce part of the familiar cooked flesh smells that are familiar around cookers during roasting and frying. Barbecues tend to produce a lot of external burning of the flesh due to exceedingly high temperatures. A gravy cube is really a cancer cube! I was always told that the gravy had all the "goodness" in it, this is what the older generation actually believe. Dr. John H. Weisburger of the American Health Foundation, has studied the link between meat and colon cancer. He says other carcinogens may also come into play when people eat well-done meat. "Meat is a very complex product . . . and when you cook it, it makes it even more complex." These new chemical are all poison as well. Burning does not produce nutrients! People who ate beef at least once a day had about double the risk of stomach cancer compared to those who had it once per week. However cooking duration was a greater risk factor than quantity eaten. Title Risk of adenocarcinoma of the stomach and esophagus with meat cooking method and doneness preference. Author Ward MH ; Sinha R ; Heineman EF ; Rothman N ; Markin R ; Weisenburger DD ; Correa P ; Zahm SH Address Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892-7364, USA. Source Int J Cancer; 71(1):14-9 1997 --- > I don't think you've figured out yet that anyone can write any book > about any type of nonsense at all, or publish their own weird opinions > about anything in the world, if they have a little money to cover the > costs. The totally dumb, and completely plagiarized 'book' by the nfl is > an example. The popular bookstore shelves are filled with, many other > bogus and foolish books you can find, with all sorts of crazy nonsense > about what to eat and what not to eat. If you find yourself with some > extra money, you too can publish your own book, about your own opinions > and any other wild nonsense in the world. Yeah, I suppose all of the above is nonsense, total BS. It's all a fraud, fake, LOL! ;) The aliens have a huge conspiracy, I suppose. (: > Just because you've read something in a book, does not mean that the > thing has any sort of truth to it at all. If anything, it is often cause > to wonder what motives prompted the author to write in the first place. Hear, hear! > The references that you have been asked for, and which you so far > haven't provided even a single one that might serve as some sort of > support for any of your passionate and silly claims about food, is a > _scientific_ reference. I would have thought that by this time, you > might have learned what a reference is, in your introductory courses of > study at whatever school you're attending. Which school is that, by the > way? I have become very curious about the breadth and depth of their > curriculum. I'm shaking, I'm shaking! :) Thanks for the insults, and do take care (I can always count on you!!) Wes