On Mon, 13 Nov 2000 12:24:15 MST, Dori Zook <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>The study showed it was a specific protein, lectins, that led to rheumatoid
>arthritis since the molecular structure of lectins are similar to that of
>human ligaments.  So it was LECTINS that caused the problem.

Could you please tell which study you are talking about?

I wrote:
>>It seems probable to me, that the problem (inrheumatoid diseases) are
>>imune
>>reactions to proteins, which enter bloodstream erraneously (as result of a
>>malfunction like "leaky gut"). Any protein will cause allergies then.

Dori:
> Any protein?
>No.  This specific protein.  Many people with rheumatoid arthritis drop
>lectin-containing grains and legumes but DO eat meats, fish and eggs and
>report dramatic success.

I'm not yet shure how far i would attribute lectins to be a health problem.
On one hand, some lectins (like from certain beans) cause immediate health
problems.
On the other hand food items with known and strong lectins did cause
few problems on populations which ate them as a staple , everyday.
Reactions with the blood (agglutination) should be of importance only if
such lectins could reach the blood. Which they normally don't.

Only in "leaky gut" or related conditions, when undigested proteins enter
the bloodstream.
If they do, then any proteins can cause allergic reactions.
As you say, i would suspect that lectins, if entering the bloodstream could
really cause more damage than just allergies.
They are designed to cause aggressive reactions, at last.


>It sounds as if you may be allergic to one meat;
>you didn't specify.  But does that make you allergic to ALL meats?

No, just one i don't recall. It' not of importance to me.
This test result was several years after avoiding all meat, so the
anti-reaction could persist for some years.

>Most mammals
>designed to live heavily on carbs for energy?  You're joking, right?  Dogs,
>lions, tigers, bears?  Please, your mental slip is showing on this one.

Which mammals do you know, beside cats and other predators?
... Got it?

Mammals generally can handle all. Carbohydrates, fats, proteins.
And how about primates?

>
>>I think carbohydrate *shouldn't* be a problem, but they are for many.
>
>Therein lies the rub.  You THINK they shouldn't be a problem but the FACT
>IS, they are.

They are? For some.
Given that carbohydrates are a natural energy source,
if the cause problems for some, where's the culprit?
(I repeat my culprit reasoning annother time not now).

If carbohydrates are not a natural energy source, then you have to explain
how and where and with which food hominids could have changed from one thats
eating 90% energy from carbohydrate (fruit) to zero.
Low-Carb may be a interesting  food regime - with benefits for overweight
and diabetics.

But you don't think we are all stemming from the arctic, where all the
australopithecines migrated to, do you?

Cheers, Amadeus