On Thu, 30 May 2002, Jim Swayze wrote:

> Todd > if the foreign protein theory is correct, the rate at which the
> foreign proteins are introduced should not be a critical variable, since
> it's what happens when they get in that is supposed to matter.
>
> But that's exactly my point.  They foreign proteins don't get in.  Just
> like whole corn goes mostly undigested, my theory is that the proteins in
> whole wheat flour aren't absorbed as well as those in white flour.
> Whatever makes the wheat "whole" buffers against absorption by the
> digestive system.

But where is the evidence for this?  It's clear that part of the
corn is undigested, but clearly a great deal of it is digested or
people like the Tarahumara wouldn't be able to live on it.

> Well, maybe Ray's wrong.  Does it really make any sense that the amount of
> foreign protein introduced makes no difference?

It makes sense if the foreign protein is supposed to be
triggering an auto-immune response.

> That's your theory.  One competing theory I'm offering here is that the
> remarkable increase in the processing of food in the 20th century has led
> to the ability of the body to take on more foreign proteins.

I'd say that an effect of processing is to reduce the protein
content -- and thus the foreign protein content -- of foods.

> > I don't know what would make it clearer.  The theory predicts that the
> Tarahumara should be dropping like flies from their high-carb, corn and
> bean based diet.  But they are extraordinarily healthy.
>
> Hold on.  Your theory predicts that.  Mine says that they should not be as
> poorly off as those of us eating processed foods.

But your theory says that their heart disease rate should still
be greater than that of hunter-gatherers who don't eat beans and
corn.  But it isn't.  Heart disease is rare among the Tarahumara.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]