Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Sun, 22 Feb 2004 19:49:28 -0700 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
>Reason 3: Even whole grains produce an unhealthfully
>high insulin response
>Rebuttal: What about sweet potatoes, yams and beans.
>Those food have low
>glycemic indices.
Glucose is just one sugar. Fructose and sucrose also have ill effects.
>Reason 1: Grains and legumes were introduced very
>recently (in evolutionary
>terms) into the human diet, and so humans are not
>adapted to eat them.
>Rebuttal: Just because humans have started eating
>grains recently doesn't mean
>that they are not good for us.
Tell her to look around her! On a more serious and annoying note, some
people's minds are made up and it doesn't matter WHAT you say. I have an
MD-friend who fits into this category; I'm sure THAT restores your faith in
The Medical Establishment. When he couldn't come up with another
scientific rebuttal to my anti-grain argument, he went the ecological route:
"But a high-protein diet is bad for the environment." I could've kept going
but life's too short so I've long-since thrown in the towel.
I have a great Cordain paper I can send you. Contact me privately. It
documents, among other things, auto-immune disorders that followed the
introduction of grains into the human diet. Remaining hunter-gatherers also
suffer no autoimmune disorders. That tidbit sometimes makes them pause to
ponder.
Otherwise, just tell 'em beans make you fart. ;o)
Dori Zook
Denver, CO
_________________________________________________________________
Say “good-bye” to spam, viruses and pop-ups with MSN Premium -- free trial
offer! http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200359ave/direct/01/
|
|
|